tnas at euronet.nl
Thu Aug 15 20:00:07 EDT 2002
At 14:16 14-8-02 -0700, Ti Kan wrote:
>Yep, primary offenders are the daytime running lights on many GM cars.
Luckily, DRLs are not yet mandatory here- but GM cars (Opels, in fact) have
the worst Xe systems around, most likely to dazzle oncoming traffic
>Indeed. I think people are reacting to the fact that HIDs emit such
>a different color of light than the standard halogens. Sure, HIDs are
>very bright, but good systems like those found on Audis have self-leveling
>feature that continuously adjust themselves so they are always aimed
>correctly. There is the unavoidable occasional "flash" when the car rides
>over bumps or crests over a hill, but you'd get that "flash" with any
>good lighting technology. The HIDs with their blue tinge is now getting
>the brunt of the blame just because they are so easy to identify and
And early systems were less refined and more likely to dazzle you. The
current systems are pretty sophisticated- just take a look at the amount of
wiring and sensors in an S4...
>Just when we finally have legal advanced lighting systems on cars here in
>the US, the last thing we want is to have the government legislate them
>away due to public ignorance.
Yup... that's tough here because everything is decided in European
commissions- a good thing sometimes, but not always.
>Now, lowering the lights on SUVs would be a good idea. Heck, I wouldn't
>shed a tear if SUVs were to go away altogether...
Another problem that's practically absent here.
More information about the quattro