Date:         Tue, 19 Dec 2006 23:15:57 -0800
Reply-To:     Jake de Villiers <crescentbeachguitar@GMAIL.COM>
Sender:       Vanagon Mailing List <vanagon@gerry.vanagon.com>
From:         Jake de Villiers <crescentbeachguitar@GMAIL.COM>
Subject:      Re: SA grills available again
Comments: To: "Oxroad@aol.com" <Oxroad@aol.com>
In-Reply-To:  <bef.ae82b7a.32ba3ae4@aol.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed

Okeydokey Jeff.

As I look through the posts in this thread spread out before me courtesy of
GMail, I don't see any by FRONTLEFTSPEAKER.

This is, no doubt, why we are miscommunicating.

I'm not arguing with your premise at all; I'm all for road courtesy.  Its
just that without FLSP's post, yours kinda came out of nowhere, so I was
trying to help.

Sorry if I'm not.

On 12/19/06, Oxroad@aol.com <Oxroad@aol.com> wrote:
>
>  As far as High Beams v. Driving Lights, I would say, you say Tomato and I
> say Tomato. (You have to pronounce "tomato" differently the first and second
> time in order for this last sentence to work.)
>
> And by that I mean, I may be wrong, but...
>
> What is technically the difference in the definition of "high beam" vs
> "driving light"? If the assumption is that the moniker "driving light" makes
> the light OK for use in areas with traffic I would say poppycock. I don't
> see how or where lights in addition to DOT low beams could not negatively
> impact other drivers.
>
> And now, as if I were itching for a fight, I'd add anyone who drives in
> traffic with anything other than their DOT approved low beams is something
> of a rube. (Well maybe not "DOT" approved low beams--but low beams at
> least.)
>
> So call them driving lights or high beams or fog lights or whatever (and I
> agree that these are different animals) but if you're in an urban area with
> traffic and you're using any of the three you're telegraphing to the world I
> am a selfish rube. (foggy condition would justify using fog lights--so in
> this case, not a rube, more of a forward thinking truth seeker.)
>
> I've heard the arguments about fog lights having that low wide beam not
> interfering with other drivers. Poppycock, I say. (that's twice I've said
> it)  First of all the maroons who drive with their fog lights on on a clear
> night are just the kind of maroons that have adjusted those foggers by
> smashing a curb so now they blind every on-coming driver and all those in
> front who have rear view mirrors. Second, even if the lights are adjusted
> properly, real world conditions like speed bumps, divits, hills, pot
> holes, convex roadways, etc. offer ample opportunities for those foggers to
> blind just about anyone in the area. And then there's the high profile
> vehicles like the EXCURSIONs or many SUVs where the foggers are mounted at
> the height of a sedans windshield, give or take.
>
> In other news, back in the day and back East my family had a Volvo with
> factory fog lights. In order to pass the state inspection the fog lights had
> to be wired so they would turn off when the high beams were on. That is to
> say if you had on the foggers and you clicked on the high beams the fogger
> would turn off. I don't know if this is still the law anywhere.
>
> I will add in California, which is a state without a plan and in the few
> places where it has a plan it is a bad one, there is no state safety
> inspection required for vehicles. Your vehicle must pass a smog test, but no
> one will ever check your brakes or light adjustment etc. As a result I would
> say at least 25% of the vehicles in this area have headlights that are
> annoyingly and dangerously out of alignment. Makes me wonder about the state
> of the brakes.
>
> I guess I got off track. But is there some technical difference between
> driving lights v. high beams?
>
> Oh, and my response was to FRONTLEFTSPEAKER's post. Kim's message hadn't
> posted yet at that time.
>
> I hope that clears something up, or starts something up. ;)
>
> Best,
> Jeff
> 83.5 Westy
> LA,CA
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> In a message dated 12/19/2006 9:59:32 PM Pacific Standard Time,
> crescentbeachguitar@GMAIL.COM writes:
>
> Jeff, why don't you read Chris' first post again.  He clearly describes
> the
> small inner lights as not high beams. They are and this is what Kim is
> referring to.  :)
>
>


--
Jake
1984 Vanagon GL
1986 Westy Weekender "Dixie"
www.crescentbeachguitar.com