Is the use of "Nite Shades" on taillights legal?

Yep yep yep.

Now I have a question: Is it just my imagination, or do the lights surrounding the headlight, and also made of clear plastic, NOT turn yellow in the same manner as the headlamps? And if it's NOT my imagination, why is this so and why can't they make headlight lenses the same way?

Well...you and I both agree on the matter, but I know at least one person who doesnt. Guy posts under the name of "Boxman". Over on sci.engr.lighting for the past several months he's been telling me I'm full of beans, that the US headlamp standards are better overall than the rest-of-world standards, the US plastic lens degradation-resistance standards are at least as good and probably better, etc.

Me, I find it kind of funny that he tries to argue from authority based on his time in the employ of the US auto lighting company that put such godawful lamps on the road as the '96-'00 Chrysler minivan (US/Canada/Mexico) headlamps, amongst many others. To be sure, there are plenty of points that can be debated back and forth regarding the relative merits of the US and rest-of-world car lighting standards. But, gee whiz, his former employer has a *lot* of bad lighting to answer for! Not really where I tend to go for knowledgeable commentary on such matters. Not when there are companies that put out good lamps meeting US standards *and* good lamps meeting rest-of-world standards.

That's an excellent question. I've noticed the same thing you have: On some makes and models, the front signalling lamps don't deteriorate as fast or severely as the adjacent headlamps. Baffling, eh?

DS

The factory headlamps on my '97 mustang clouded over and I replaced them after getting sick of polishing them and the driver's side one developing a crack from an impact. However, the turn/marker lights, right next to the headlamps, having seen the exact same conditions over the years remained like new. One has since been replaced due to the poor driving a 17 year old and the other has a very small rock chip in it, but these lamps have been fine.

Also the plastic taillamp and marker lamp lenses of my '73 maverick are still like new some 30 years after they were made. Of course the headlamps on that car are sealed beam and glass.

I've noticed that the non-headlamps don't appear to have the UV/hardcoat either. Obviously there is a difference in the resin itself. Why that resin does not make for a good headlamp I cannot tell. It seems to be able to be molded with acceptable optical properties.

My guess is the heat from the headlamps causes the difference. Over time the plastic breaks down from it, I guess.

Isn't heat more of an issue in the headlamp? Both heat and UV can turn plastic yellow.

Not really, no -- the bigger issue is UV from the headlamp bulbs. Heat's secondary.

Considering the damage is the outside surface of the head lamp, I would say the issue is UV from the sun. If it was UV from the bulb, the inside surface without the hardcoat would yellow and all the polishing in the world wouldn't make a difference.

It is a 99 Van den Plas. Any clues for the owner?

In fact, we used to buy a handful of the things and replace them whenever they got dirty. They were only a couple of bucks each.

Police here are very unlikely to notice a minor infraction like this. Heck, they don't even notice major infractions unless their 'Boss Hogg' nature comes out.

You are not too far off. For a 2003 Ford Focus the list price on the headlights is $161.00. Fordpartsonline will sell you one for $120.75. Of course this is still pretty cheap comapred to say a Toyota Camry ($253 list / $190 discounted).

Ed

Perhaps UV emission FROM the headlamp itself contributes to faster deterioration?

Yep.

DS

Yeah, and black tail lights look exceptionally good on a Cayenne red metallic Camaro. Ask me how I know... :-)

But the safety

How often do you drive any of your Studebakers in the dark.

Ulf

In addition to the sun, but I would guess not enough to actually damage the lamp by itself since the inside surface is usually not deteriorated, just the outside.

Ulf wrote:

well, I haven't driven *any* of my personal vehicles any appreciable distance at all for months; but that's more due to a combination of bad luck, stupidity, and a lack of free time.

car #1 (listed in order of acquisition) '62 Studebaker hardtop: Blew up clutch in a "burnout contest" leaving a car show last year. Have not fixed yet due to large number of "while you're in theres" that need to be addressed.

car #2: '88 Porsche 944: previous daily hawler, was hit 'n' run in the LR quarter panel while parked in front of my house only weeks after getting a company car. After a long stint in the body shop, noticed a severe vibration from the rear end. Has been in and out of shops since; is currently at the third shop where at least the mechanic was correctly able to reproduce the symptoms I was describing, which is more than I can say about the first two. He's had it for almost a week now, hopefully he will be able to identify and fix the problem. Porsche withdrawal is approaching "need methadone NOW" stage.

car #3: '55 Studebaker coupe, with a badly done '63 289/Flightomatic transplant. Still waiting on various pieces parts to be done before it can be considered roadworthy. A guy in Florida is supposed to be polishing a timing cover for me and making me an adapter plate so that I can run an early water outlet on the late water pump housing. (right now it has an ugly flex hose with two different sized ends, I want to use the correct molded hose, because I like a tidy engine compartment.) I need those two pieces before I can address the massive oil leaks from the engine, which appear to be in the front seal (in timing cover) and oil pan (which would be stupid to R&R if I'm going to do the timing cover later.) Also waiting on a local machine shop to true up the aftermarket aluminum intake I bought and stupidly had polished before I test fit it. (hey, a Stude engine needs all the weight savings it can get. It's strong, but strength comes at a price...) Also waiting on a guy in CA to send me various pieces of glass that I need, notably the front vent windows. (want to stop the massive water leaks, but both of my vent windows are busted, and not worth putting new gaskets on.) Same guy is supposed to send me the correct linkages for my current motor/tranny/body combination to replace the kludged together mess I whipped up to replace the even more incorrect mess that the previous owner hacked into the car. (engine/trans apparently came out of a Lark body, not a Hawk (later iteration of the "Loewy coupe" body style,) and when the gas pedal linkage didn't line up, he simply cut the hole in the floor bigger with a muffler chisel. Yeeesh.)

But that said, the '55 is intended to be a daily-driver type car. I'm not actually going to use it as such, but I plan it to be capable of such duty when I'm through with it. The heater is already fully functional, and as I said in another post, I plan on adding Cibies and a relay harness to it. It's running electronic ignition, a Delco alternator, and I've got 15x7" wheels with modern radials. I've also added gas shocks and late model (well, 63-64) "Super Hawk" sway bars front and rear, heavy duty springs, and completely gone through the suspension. I've already taken a good stab at sealing up the leaky trunk; we will see when my NOS trunk hinge arrives if it's truly watertight now. Future plans include a 60's vintage under dash A/C unit if I can make a Sanden compressor clear the hood, and also maybe a set of disc brakes and a dual circuit master cylinder. Windshield washers are another item for which I'm keeping my eyes open.

So the short answer is, not at all lately, but if I can manage to reverse my current trend of automotive nonfunctionality, probably more than you'd think.

nate

The amount of UV that comes off the filament of a halogen capsule is rather amazing. And I'm not convinced that all the apparent damage IS on the outside.

The once completely fogged over headlamp from my car is now sitting on a desk in my bedroom in very acceptable condition. I polished the outside, the inside is not accessible.

I wonder if the UV protective layer deteriorated first, since it is designed to absorb UV. If its only applied to the outside, that would explain a lot. It would receive damage both from the sun AND from the headlamp filament.

You really seem to have your work cut out for you. But at least you're not having these problems in the summer, and commuting in the snow and salt with a car you care about is no fun anyway. Hell, I drive a BMW 535 the whole winter instead of my Camaro, but what you gonna do...

Ulf