Re: Headlights,Headlights

[colin cohen <102621.2256@compuserve.com>]

I have understood your point as a bitter antagonist of AoA's take it or leave it
attitude to lighting for what amounts to 10 or more years...at least up to the
the 1994 models.

I have also much sympathy for the other members of the forum who have taken the
truly Merican attitude that more is ALWAYS more, after all thats how US cars
have been built since the 50s.

But the real point is why AoA has ignored this obvious failing in their vehicles
for so long, while producing a passable product in Deutchland.  After all Ford
had the same problem with the Taurus, but the new model has corrected this to
the point that there is some criticism that their lights may be too generous as
to spread, given the 65W main beams.  I spent some time on this exercise with
BLV, now part of Osram in germany, but formerly owned by what is now a GE sub.,
and we convinced ourselves that the Audi 1986 4K lights were never designed for
operation per se. Just to fit, not blind and meet DOT material requirements.
The lens fluting is illogical, casuing light dispersion opposite to the
direction of most of the reflector, and of course the glass absorbs as much as
45% of the light.  And othe filaments are way off their geometric focus point.
Crazy!

Let me aslo add my 2 cents to those complaining about the listers who copy whole
messages and digests.  I think we need to have some patience here.  There is no
easy method for people to learn netiquette, and the list concept is not clearly
understood by many.  By opening this list to Internet as opposed to ISP access a
la CIS etc, we will have to indulge the tremendous interest that some of these
things generate.

Now if only we could translate that interest into a campaign to tell Audi what
models we want to see offered in the US...like the S6 Plus for example.