2006 Jetta xenon headlight problem

Just bought a Jetta 1.9 TDi, and everything is going well with it, except that...

There seems to be a gap between where the low beams light up the road and here the high beams take over.

It's not a lot but I;'ve never seen this on any car before, this being the 3rd VW that I've had in the last 5 years with xenons...

It almost looks as though the low beams are too low, and the high beams are too high, they seem to light up the trees down the road more than they do the road itself :-(

I'd appreciate any comments you guys might have on this, the car has already been into the dealership twice in 3 weeks, but they say they can do much as the beams move progressively with each other, and they can't get them to merge.

Anyone else seen this problem ? is there a fix for this "feature" ?

Canada Bob.

Reply to
Canada Bob
Loading thread data ...

if the beams are not independently adjustable then you're out of luck. usually in a case like this where they're combined into the same assembly they're made so that you aim via the low beam and the high beam is already made to be aimed correctly when the low beam is correctly aimed.

p.s...if you have a TDI...they're not xenon. xenons are standard on the GLI and optional on the 2.0T and not available on the 2.5 and TDI.

Reply to
Matt B.

Hello Matt

That's how they are Matt, twinned so to speak, move one you move the other, but there shouldn't be a blind spot inbetween the beams, and there is...

Not sure how it works Matt on a country to country basis, this is a

2006 TDi made for the Canadian market {that's where I am}, and when I ordered the car 3 months back I got all the bells and whistles added on, including some pack or other with the xenons on, so they are xenons I've stood infront of them to get a tan, grin.

Thanks for your comments Matt, appreciated.

Tell you what I like the most though, the 80 MPG that I'm getting, I've had enough of gas/petrol engines, even though gas is just 40p a litre here in Canada, it's a hellish 90p a litre on average in the UK.

Canada Bob.

Reply to
Canada Bob

here in the USA they use one bulb and the beams are controlled by a "shutter" to make the low & hi beam. There may be a basic setting which the dealer should have done by now. Other than that... that's the way they work.

Reply to
Lost In Space/Woodchuck

80 mpg in an '06 Jetta? What, do you only drive downhill or something? What are you going to do once you reach the ocean?

-- Mike S

Reply to
Mike Smith

Hi,

How odd it that, they're all made in Mexico, yet they seem to be different ?

Bob.

Reply to
Canada Bob

Hi Mike...

LOL, be nice if I could, but it would be tough to get home again.

The thing is, I'd got used to seeing 65 MPG plus, but last week on a drive around on the back roads, not the highways, I'd been out for about 3 hours, doing 35-50 MPH, I'd 125 miles on the trip clock since starting out. I glanced down to see 80.1 MPG, and that was the average MPG not the momentary MPG, that's what we'd averaged over a 3 hour drive !!! I was so astonished that I got the wife to take a photo of it, let me have an e-mail {any of you} and I'll send you a copy.

Blew me away that did... but there is a bit of a secret, I had the car for about a month just running it in, sort of, and was getting 65 MPG to 70 MPG and was quiet happy with that...

Then {as I usually do with cars, snow blowers, lawn mowers, boats etc etc} I put in some molybdenum disulphide {I'm a Lubrication Engineer, and I've worked with this stuff for around 40 years now}.

A couple of days later the MPG has gone up and around 75 to 80 MPG, I'm thrilled with that, compares very well with a 2005 93 Saab TDi that I had doing 65 MPG, but that car was around 300 lbs heavier than the Jetta.

Probably around 14 knots :-)

Canada Bob.

Reply to
Canada Bob

Um, are these Imperial gallons by chance?

-- Mike Smith

Reply to
Mike Smith

But if the lamp is designed that way (whether intentional or not...as long as it meets Canadian MVSS 108...it's legal) and isn't adjustable, there isn't anything that can really be done about it.

Must have been different equipment in canada then I guess.

Reply to
Matt B.

if he's in canada though he might be converting to imperial gallons...which would stands a better chance of getting 80mpg because imperial gallons are larger than US gallons.

Reply to
Matt B.

I suppose, but that would still be 64 mpg US.

-- Mike Smith

Reply to
Mike Smith

Hello Mike...

Yep, IMP's it is Mike...

Canada Bob.

Reply to
Canada Bob

Hello Matt...

Don't I know it, it's a pain in the *ss... add to that there's lots of things that "should" meet Canadian standards but they don't... yet I feel I have a duff set of lights, I'm sure they should "overlap" and not leave a blind/dak spot on the road...

Canada Bob.

Reply to
Canada Bob

Me again...

20% more Matt, 3.6 litres vs 4.5 litres, US Gallon to a Cnd Gallon.

Paying $4 Cnd a gallon for diesel right now...

Canada Bob.

Reply to
Canada Bob

Me again...

20% more Matt, 3.6 litres vs 4.5 litres, US Gallon to a Cnd Gallon.

Paying $4 Cnd a gallon for diesel right now...

Canada Bob.

Reply to
Canada Bob

25% larger (3.8 vs. 4.5) actually. An Imperial gallon is 25% larger than a US gallon, and a US gallon is 20% smaller than an Imperial gallon.

-- Mike Smith

Reply to
Mike Smith

Hello Mike...

Yer right... I was thinking the wrong way around, those percentages always get me :-)

Canada Bob.

Reply to
Canada Bob

Reply to
none2u

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.