Re: A head light comparison

["Romeo Shayne Pavlic'" <bcpi@arias.net>]

you are probably right, but i have no idea as i did not do the test or write
the report.


shayne. 
----------
>From: Scott Sierakowski <scott@collectorspub.com>
>To: "quattro@coimbra.ans.net" <quattro@coimbra.ans.net>
>Subject: Re: A head light comparison
>Date: Thu, Feb 25, 1999, 08:30
>

>In message <199902250652.WAA06695@mt.arias.net> "Romeo Shayne Pavlic'"
>writes:
>
>>    PIAA offers these bulbs in the following versions:
>>       H4  60/55W (claimed equivalent to 110/100W halogens)
>>       H4  80/80W (claimed equivalent to 135/115W halogens)
>>       H3  55W  (claimed equivalent to 85W halogens)
>>       H3  85W  (claimed equivalent to 135W halogens)
>>       9004 65/45w  (claimed equivelent to 110/85W)
>>       9005 60W (claimed equivalent to 110W)
>>   and 9006 51W (claimed equivalent to 100W)
>
>Is this a mistake a  H4  80/80W (claimed equivalent to 135/115W
>halogens)
>
>Should this read H4 100/80?  I'm no scientist but to get 135/115W out of
>80/80W seems wrong.
>
>Scott
>95 90Q Sport
>