Is it possible to pick up European Code tail lights for an 04 Town and Country and install them in a North American vehicle with just some minor changes to the wires and bulb holders? I'm headed for Italy and would pick up a pair if this is possible. Remember, by 04 the North American version has just one bulb plus backup bulb. Thanks.
Richard.
The taillamp clusters themselves will fit. The single-bulb tail/stop/turn setup in your 2004 means you will need to do some rewiring. It's not all that difficult to do if the 2004 wiring setup is the same one Chrysler's been using for years on their vehicles with single-bulb tail/stop/turn setups: You need to cut the wire that runs from the brake lamp switch to the turn signal switch. The existing brake lamp wires then become your turn signal wires, and you run a new wire from the brake lamp switch side of the cut wire to the rear of the vehicle, to power the brake lamps. Make it a nice 14ga wire and you can hook up both the factory brake and factory rear-fog lamps in the European-code taillamps to act as brake lamps (spend another couple minutes and add a diode or two and you can have a rear fog *and* quad brake lamps).
While you're over there, why not get the good headlamps, too?
If I get these (if a dealer in Rome has them in stock, or if I find them at a local Roman junk yard, ha,) I will wire in one of the rear fog lights while I'm at it. Would all you nice newsgroup people please start up a fund to help me pay for all those nice parts?
Richard.
Why not just sell it and buy one over there?
Ted
Perhaps it's because he's only *visiting* over there, I donno, on a vacation or somesuch, and wishes better lighting on his minivan when he returns home.
Exactly right. I just wish Mr. Stern was more successful at getting the government in Canada to mandate better lighting.
Richard.
FMVSS should demand this:
All lighting on a vehicle should be on at ALL times... when driving that is.
I see far too many people in the rain, during the day, no lights on... (other than DRL). what's up with that??
I use my rear fogs in adverse conditions... that's why my bumper has no damage ;) (Volvo)
These rear fogs sound like a great idea. Are they like tail lights only brighter?
Are they required in all European Countries, or only Germany?
-Kirk Matheson
Rear fogs are allowed in North America and several import vehicles have them here. I understand that just one bright red rear segment pm the left rear is best but both sides lit is permitted here and many if not most imports with rear fogs sport that arrangement.
Richard.
The government in Canada doesn't need convincing. They (or "he", more accurately, i.e. the Canadian regulator in charge of motor vehicle lighting and reflective devices) is fully aware that red rear turn signals are dumb. He knows there should be less glare from low beams and DRLs. He knows side turn signal repeaters should be on every car. He knows the value of a rear fog lamp. He knows there ought to be stringent standards for front fog lamps' performance, mounting and installation. The problem is with the Americans! Remember, the North American Auto Pact of 1965 effectively locked Canada into line with US vehicle regulations. What differences exist are generally minor, and it's kept that way by the US auto industry and the US DOT (specifically NHTSA).
Canada was looking at accepting all ECE standards, as well as whole ECE vehicles. The idea passed all safety analyses (of course it would, for the road-safest nations in the world all require or permit ECE standards), but the automakers and US DOT hollered bloody murder about it. The automakers said "When we build a car for the German market, that's where we want it to stay. We don't want it showing up in Canada. If you do this, you'll be taking away our control over what vehicles enter the Canadian market, and that will undermine our marketing strategy." US DOT said "If you allow ECE, we'll be the only country in the world doing something different." So, the idea was quashed, because the US didn't want Canada to do it.
But, when Canada last brought up the idea of mandating amber rear turn signals, the US auto industry threatened to take Canada to free-trade court over it. Because of the way the "free trade" agreements of the last four decades are written, Canada would lose.
So, there you have it. Sign "free trade" agreements with one hand to eliminate tarrifs and monetary trade barriers, then write different-from-the-rest-of-the-world-but-not-better technical standards to hide trade barriers in with the right hand. There is no such a thing as "free trade", folks.
Works both ways. I remember Canadian having a hissy fit over USA gas makers not using their MTBE in gasoline.
That's not the same type of squabbling, that's just run-of-the-mill "Hey, we offer the product you use, why won't you buy it from us? No fair!" whining.
The problem is with the Americans! Remember, the North
But: Based on a decision by the WTO dispute panel in 2001, the Auto Pact was abolished as the panel ruled that parts of the Canada-United States Auto Pact broke global trade rules by favoring some countries over others. This ended the 35-year-old centerpiece of Canada's automotive policy.
Also, someone has suggested that putting Euro Code tail lights in the 04 mini-van will throw off the electronic control system. Is this true even if the break lights are rewired?
Richard.
Of course, but so what? NAFTA superceded the Auto Pact. My comments still apply.
Of course someone suggested that. People "suggest" all kinds of stupid crapola when they don't know what they're talking about.
No, The Manufactures got the US government to have a hissy fit, because Canada used MTBE, and blamed failure's of o-rings in injectors on MTBE used in Canada's gasoline.
I think you have confused MMT, i.e. Manganese Methylcyclopentadienyl Tricarbonyl, which is a metallic octane booster, with MTBE, Methyl Tertiary Butyl Ether, which is an oxygenate. I also think you've confused the nature of the hissy fit you seem to recall. MTBE has been widely used in US gasoline since the mid-1980s, while MMT was severely restricted and subsequently banned in the US in the late 1980s. MMT, however, was widely used in Canadian gasoline until just a couple of years ago. That is because when Environment Canada attempted to ban it, on the sound basis of its deleterious effect on auto exhaust toxicity and emission control device longevity and effectiveness, the US company that made most of the MMT, Ethyl Corporation, sued Canada in Free Trade Court -- and won, despite the similarly-based US ban on MMT in gasoline.
Ethyl Corp, of course, is the company that makes most of the world's Tetraethyl Lead, i.e., lead additive for gasoline. They have a long history of behaving just like a tobacco company.
MotorsForum website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.