Are your headlight lenses getting cloudy?
Daniel J. Stern wrote:
> The headlamps in question ('92 Explorer) have low overall output, poor > focus, a low peak intensity, narrow beam width and high levels of upward > stray light. All of those factors add up to an objectively poor beam. Now, THAT is fascinating! Of course I don't have the ol' '92 around anymore so further discussion of it's headlight performance would be worse than subjective. I ran them day and night and changed bulbs perhaps two times in the 11 years I owned it. I put better-than-OEM Halogen bulbs in it, so maybe thats why I was happy with it -- or maybe they were holographic and gave only the appearance of projected perfection. I went from a '81 Chevy pickup to the '92 Explorer, and believe me -- the Explorer lights were infinitely better than those of the Chevy PU. The '99's low beams are average, the "brights" are pretty good, focus could be better, and I like being able to read the graffiti on the under-side of the over-pass, but the "narrow" comment above is absurd -- subjectively speaking -- but like I said, my everyday comparison is the '97 Sebring. I have yet to change a headlight bulb on the '99 Explorer. I can hardly wait to see what it will do with AM bulbs -- probably have to get a special license for it. My first car (and my only other Chrysler product) was a '47 Dodge, and with the lights and the tin-foil body work, I think I've had my last Chrysler, if the rest are like the Sebring. Don't even get me started on its electrics and ghost-ridden alarm system. And 25 mpg -- BFD. Jack |
My lenses are very cloudy- any inexpensive replacements you know of?
|
Try polishing them with a cleaner/wax compound. I've been successful
cleaning up light lenses that way. On Fri, 09 Sep 2005 02:08:44 -0400, "nashjeff" > wrote: >My lenses are very cloudy- any inexpensive replacements you know of? > |
"Jack" > wrote in message m... > Daniel J. Stern wrote: > > > The headlamps in question ('92 Explorer) have low overall output, poor > > focus, a low peak intensity, narrow beam width and high levels of upward > > stray light. All of those factors add up to an objectively poor beam. > > Now, THAT is fascinating! > > Of course I don't have the ol' '92 around anymore so further discussion > of it's headlight performance would be worse than subjective. I ran them > day and night and changed bulbs perhaps two times in the 11 years I > owned it. I put better-than-OEM Halogen bulbs in it, so maybe thats why > I was happy with it -- or maybe they were holographic and gave only the > appearance of projected perfection. I think they work so well that's it's difficult to tell if you have one not working unless you go out and look. |
inside or outside??
"Big Shoe" > wrote in message ... Try polishing them with a cleaner/wax compound. I've been successful cleaning up light lenses that way. On Fri, 09 Sep 2005 02:08:44 -0400, "nashjeff" > wrote: >My lenses are very cloudy- any inexpensive replacements you know of? > |
Jack wrote:
> I went from a '81 Chevy pickup to the '92 Explorer, and believe me -- > the Explorer lights were infinitely better than those of the Chevy PU. Well, the 81 Chevy would have had good old sealed beams. Now 99.9% of the sealed-beams I've ever had were about 100 times BETTER than 90s vintage plastic Explorer headlamps (or pretty much ANY 1990s plastic specific-to-a-given-model headlamp). But its always possible that you had some really, really, really poor non-halogen sealed beams in the Chevy, or halogens with a cracked outer housing that allowed moisture to darken the reflectors, or a wiring problem. |
Outside only! If they are clouded up inside, I don't know any way to
fix them. I think they are a sealed unit, but someone else may know more about that. On Fri, 9 Sep 2005 15:54:51 -0500, "stevie" > wrote: >inside or outside?? >"Big Shoe" > wrote in message .. . >Try polishing them with a cleaner/wax compound. I've been successful >cleaning up light lenses that way. > >On Fri, 09 Sep 2005 02:08:44 -0400, "nashjeff" > >wrote: > >>My lenses are very cloudy- any inexpensive replacements you know of? >> > |
Steve wrote:
> Well, the 81 Chevy would have had good old sealed beams. Now 99.9% of > the sealed-beams I've ever had were about 100 times BETTER than 90s > vintage plastic Explorer headlamps (or pretty much ANY 1990s plastic > specific-to-a-given-model headlamp). My '92 Explorer headlights were glass. Jack |
On Sat, 10 Sep 2005, Jack wrote:
> My '92 Explorer headlights were glass. Ummm...no. They weren't. Not unless you bought your '92 Explorer in Germany, where glass-and-metal standard-format 200mm x 142mm rectangular lamps were used (same size/shape as the large rectangular sealed beams in your '81 Chev pickup, but in Europe they were a replaceable-bulb H4 unit). North American-market Explorer headlamps used a plastic lens and a plastic reflector. |
Daniel J. Stern wrote:
> North American-market Explorer headlamps used a plastic lens and a plastic > reflector. OMG! They were plastic -- and I loved them? Eeeeuuuuwwww. Jack |
All times are GMT +1. The time now is 01:33 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
AutoBanter.com