For those interested in old cars.

[chriswright03]

17 hours ago, alastairq said:

Are we talking about the 'high-level' brake lights that seem to have found favour?

Found favour?  You mean fitted by law?

[alastairq]

6 minutes ago, chriswright03 said:

Found favour?  You mean fitted by law?

 They are now......but, the idea had to come from somewhere?  Someone thought it was a good idea?

[uax6]

At the Ely exhibition on Saturday:

 

Rather Nice I think. Dot was the only other classic there ('62 4dr minor).

 

Andy G

[Kingzance]

1 hour ago, uax6 said:

At the Ely exhibition on Saturday:

 

Rather Nice I think. Dot was the only other classic there ('62 4dr minor).

 

Andy G

Even with a cover, how would you dry out that space, particularly under the chequer-plate? Fibreglass body or not, it would be an issue!

[APOLLO]

Going back a few years (1974) I fitted two superb Raydyot oblong spot lamps to my 73  1.8 Marina. I transferred these to my next two cars, a 1975 Princess 1800 hl (superb car despite its "reputation" and my 1982 Ford Capri 1.6 Cabriolet. I wish I still had all 3 of these cars !!!

 

Is Raydyot  still going ?

 

Brit15

 

 

[rodent279]

8 minutes ago, APOLLO said:

Going back a few years (1974) I fitted two superb Raydyot oblong spot lamps to my 73  1.8 Marina. I transferred these to my next two cars, a 1975 Princess 1800 hl (superb car despite its "reputation" and my 1982 Ford Capri 1.6 Cabriolet. I wish I still had all 3 of these cars !!!

 

Is Raydyot  still going ?

 

Brit15

 

 

Bet one of them is the Princess?

 

May dad had one, lovely metallic blue. The paint peeled quite badly though. Nice car, built like a tank, very comfortable.

[Jol Wilkinson]

2 hours ago, alastairq said:

 They are now......but, the idea had to come from somewhere?  Someone thought it was a good idea?

I too thought they were a legal requirement but could only find them as "optional" in the Construction and Use Regulations.

 

I believe the original idea was that you could see them ahead through the windows of the car(s) in front for increased safety. Nowadays it means you can more readily tailgate the car in front.

[jwealleans]

Typical.  The first year for as long as I can remember I've not been on car parking and something interesting turns up.

[chriswright03]

3 hours ago, alastairq said:

 They are now......but, the idea had to come from somewhere?  Someone thought it was a good idea?

It is a good idea because it makes the brake lights more visible in a line of traffic.  It only becomes a problem when people keep their foot on the brake while stopped in traffic.  Yes it annoys me as well but some cars make it difficult to not have your foot on the brake.  I had a newish Golf that was a DSG gearbox with stop start.  If you pulled up at the lights for example the engine would cut out as the Government decided it should do.  If you put your handbrake on and took your foot off the brake it would start again!  So the only way to keep the engine off was to keep your foot on the brake.  Stupid I know but hey what do we know?

[Hobby]

I don't understand that. The Golf with the DSG box and S/S has an automatic handbrake which hold the car when you stop and the engine stops. The only time it doesn't is when you deliberately switch off Hill Hold. (I'm on my third DSG Golf with S/S and Hill Hold brakes, the first one was 8 years ago so it's not new technology and I've been using it since 2001).

 

With my older autos I've tended to keep my foot on the brake at traffic lights rather than put the car in neutral and use the handbrake unless I know the lights are going to take a few minutes to change. I once criticised an auto car driver for doing that but having driven one I can now see why he did it.

[boxbrownie]

2 hours ago, Jol Wilkinson said:

I too thought they were a legal requirement but could only find them as "optional" in the Construction and Use Regulations.

 

I believe the original idea was that you could see them ahead through the windows of the car(s) in front for increased safety. Nowadays it means you can more readily tailgate the car in front.

 

The original idea....Volvo.........I suppose the seat belt by Volvo idea was a stupid idea as well? 

[Hobby]

I thought they came from America and a quick search confirms that, Volvo may have been responsible for many things but the third high level brake light wasn't one of them, some American Psychologist called Veovodsky it seems!

[Nick C]

On 20/05/2019 at 11:32, Prometheus said:

 

Not always the case that drivers fail to apply the handbrake: in my car (and other makes), the brake lights remain on when the automatic brake is applied to stop the car rolling at traffic lights. They remain on until the accelerator deactivates the brakes. It’s just a safety feature. And to be honest, I’d rather be seen than driven into....

 

Tony

 

This shows just how disconnected things have become - how did they manage to get type approval for a car that prevents the driver from obeying the highway code?

 

Quote

 

Rule 114:

You MUST NOT

use any lights in a way which would dazzle or cause discomfort to other road users, including pedestrians, cyclists and horse riders

use front or rear fog lights unless visibility is seriously reduced. You MUST switch them off when visibility improves to avoid dazzling other road users (see Rule 226).

In stationary queues of traffic, drivers should apply the parking brake and, once the following traffic has stopped, take their foot off the footbrake to deactivate the vehicle brake lights. This will minimise glare to road users behind until the traffic moves again.

 

 

 

[Hobby]

Just to clarify (and I've just gone out and checked this on the Golf with the help of my daughter!) when the car is in Drive and is held by the automatic brakes the rear brake lights are NOT lit, they only come on when the brake peddle is depressed. Hill Hold does not leave the brake lights on.

[big jim]

I dunno, I get kicked off to a new thread with my ‘modern cars’ and now we have pages of discussion about new cars brake lights! 

[Hobby]

Quite right Jim, and I'm as guilty as the others! Trouble is people insist on putting new types of lights in old cars!

[big jim]

hobby, is that an admission that my mini is in fact an ‘old car’? 

 

After all the discussion only started after I put LED sidelights on my mini 

Edited May 21, 2019 by big jim

[PatB]

8 hours ago, alastairq said:

 They are now......but, the idea had to come from somewhere?  Someone thought it was a good idea?

 

I don't know about who, but as to when, I remember articles in mags like Practical Motorist c1981 on fitting aftermarket ones. 

 

2 hours ago, Nick C said:

 

This shows just how disconnected things have become - how did they manage to get type approval for a car that prevents the driver from obeying the highway code?

 

 

 

 

Note that the bit about applying the parking brake is prefaced with "should" so it's not, in itself, a mandatory requirement. 

[Hobby]

31 minutes ago, big jim said:

hobby, is that an admission that my mini is in fact an ‘old car’? 

 

After all the discussion only started after I put LED sidelights on my mini 

 

Nice try!

[boxbrownie]

3 hours ago, Hobby said:

I thought they came from America and a quick search confirms that, Volvo may have been responsible for many things but the third high level brake light wasn't one of them, some American Psychologist called Veovodsky it seems!

 

Well the story is a New York cabbie got so pissed at being rear ended in traffic he fitted up a big extra stop lamp wired to the brake lights on the centre rear of the roof of his cab, this was back in the 70’s (big cars, cr@p brakes, New York drivers). The NTSA heard about it and started an investigation.......well over there anything was “unsafe at any speed” back in the 70’s.......good old Nader 

[royaloak]

1 hour ago, big jim said:

hobby, is that an admission that my mini is in fact an ‘old car’? 

 

After all the discussion only started after I put LED sidelights on my mini 

Nice try!

Old doesnt make it a classic, I have a 1993 Peugeot 106 but I wouldnt post about it in the other thread, but I would in this one would post about it in this one which is about modern(ish) cars.

 

So are you actually complaining (in the loosest possible sense) about thread drift which you actually started? 

Edited May 21, 2019 by royaloak
referring to wrong thread, I got confooosed.

[big jim]

16 minutes ago, royaloak said:

Nice try!

Old doesnt make it a classic, I have a 1993 Peugeot 106 but I wouldnt post about it in the other thread, but I would in this one.

 

So are you actually complaining (in the loosest possible sense) about thread drift which you actually started? 

 

But this thread is called “old cars” not “classic cars”, to my eyes the mini is “old” therefore fitted nicely in this thread, to others it wasn’t old enough hence a modern classics thread was started 

 

I’ll  leave it to other to decide if your Peugeot is worthy/acceptable of being in the “old cars” thread as you recon but it’s more than welcome in the “modern classics” thread (which is where I’d say it would be at home personally!)

 

m not complaining at all but it’s amazing what swapping a couple of pieces of filament on a car has opened for discussion with very little in the way of old cars discussed or shown in between the posts about brake lights

 

now where are those pics of my mums 20 year old BMW Z3, those will cause a good argument, 20 years = old, Z3 = modern classic 

 

likely to rip a hole in the space time continuum that one

 

(I am being tongue in cheek, just can’t post tongue out emojis etc!)

 

[stewartingram]

23 minutes ago, boxbrownie said:

 

Well the story is a New York cabbie got so pissed at being rear ended in traffic he fitted up a big extra stop lamp wired to the brake lights on the centre rear of the roof of his cab, this was back in the 70’s (big cars, cr@p brakes, New York drivers). The NTSA heard about it and started an investigation.......well over there anything was “unsafe at any speed” back in the 70’s.......good old Nader 

Way back when, Grandad had an Austin Ruby. There was a single brake light mounted (in the number plate light) below the (small) rear window. There were 2 rear lights on the rear wings though.

I always thought, byy the time I was driving, that separating the brake light out to the centre of the car, away from the rearlights, was a good idea, making it more noticeable, though I would have combined the operation with the more normal twin brake lights with the rear lights.

Funny how things come to pass.....

 

Stewart

[royaloak]

4 minutes ago, big jim said:

(I am being tongue in cheek, just can’t post tongue out emojis etc!)

 

I think quite a few posts are tongue in cheek.

 

My Pug is old but definitely not a classic, I suppose its just a question of having somewhere to post about 'our' cars , other peoples definition will be quite different, my friend changes his car every 3 years because he doesnt want an 'old' car, yep he thinks a 4 year old car is old.

[Porkscratching]

It's funny, you get Sierras going for crazy money now, the last one I had cost me 80 quid, and I finally scrapped it when it was past MOT'ing...