Re: IML: Side Marker Lamps/Reflectors

["Bill Watson" <wwatson5@xxxxxxxxx>]

Why use the same bulb for parking lights / turn signals at the front and
taillights / brake lights / turn signals at the rear?  Simple, it is cheap
and it meets the requirements of the law.   They use a double filament bulb
with the 'high beam' used for the turn signals at the front and the brake /
turn signals at the rear.  The 'low beam' is used for the parking lights at
the froint and taillights at the rear.

Laws in the United States and Canada only stipulate that the taillight /
brake lights must be red.  Starting with the 1963 model year, manufacturers
adopted amber at the front for turn signls and parking lights.   The amber
lights stood out from the white light of the headlights.  Some cars, such as
the 1979 Aspen and Volare, had amber turn signals at the rear, but they were
not required by law.  And they cost more as the units needed another wire
lead, another socket, another bulb, and a lens with two (or three) colours .
It may only add up to $2 or $3 per car, but when you are bulding 500,000
cars a year, that becomes a good chunk of change.   And in the case of the
1979 Aspen/Volare. when you are losing hundreds of millions a year, that is
$1 million to $1.5 million that could be put to better use.

In North America, prior to 1970, it was not necessary to have the parking
lights on at the same time as the headlights, although Barracuda started
that in 1964.

Bill
Vancouver, BC



----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Darryl Skerman" <daskerman@xxxxxxxxxxx>
To: <mailing-list@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Thursday, September 14, 2006 3:58 AM
Subject: Re: IML: Side Marker Lamps/Reflectors


> I've been going through the process of getting my '76 New Yorker Brougham
> registered here in Australia.  One of the things they insist on is the
> correct coloured lights for parkers and indicators.  I had to add separate
> white parker lights at the front (which conveniently fitted into the
> existing parker/indicator housing) and separate amber indicator lights at
> the rear.  I fitted some amber lights into the bumper-mounted reflector
> slots.  I have to confess that I thought it was odd to have the indicators
> double as the parkers at the front and the indicators double as the brake
> lights at the rear - I'd like to know the history of why North America
> adopted that standard.
>
> I'm not sure what the regulations are in Europe but I thought Great
Britain
> was the same as Australia.  Also, Australian compliance has required amber
> indicator repeater lights on the front fenders since the early '90s.
> They're usually behind the wheel arch or on the door-mounted rear view
> mirrors.  Presumably this is so another vehicle can see your intention to
> turn from the side.  All I know is that they generally use 5 watt globes.
>
>
> ---- Original Message ----- 
> From: "Brad Hogg" <luxoliner@xxxxxxx>
> To: <mailing-list@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Sent: Thursday, September 14, 2006 6:36 AM
> Subject: Re: IML: Side Marker Lamps/Reflectors
>
>
> > Some good points Chris.
> >
> > IMO, turn signals should always be amber and stop lights should always
be
> > red.  It's simple logic.  The rules of the road state that a flashing
> > amber
> > light means "CAUTION".  You see those at construction zones etc where
> > there
> > may be "something different happening".  A flashing red light means
"STOP
> > and proceed with caution".  Many intersections have a flashing red light
> > coupled with a stop sign.  Many intersection signal lights will flash
red
> > one direction and amber the other in non-peak hours.  I fail to see why
> > this
> > convention has been broken on North American built vehicles.  Have you
> > ever
> > followed a vehicle that incorporates the stop and turn signals into the
> > same
> > bulb?  If the driver puts on the turn signal then pumps the brake some,
> > you
> > can't tell what's going to happen as the red lights on both sides are
> > flashing.
> >
> > Turn signals should always be amber, IMO.
> >
> > ----- Original Message ----- 
> > From: "Christopher H" <imperial67@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > To: <mailing-list@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > Sent: Wednesday, September 13, 2006 12:10 PM
> > Subject: Re: IML: Side Marker Lamps/Reflectors
> >
> >
> > 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
> >
> >
> >
> > -----------------  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