[Tiapan]

Originally Posted by Keepleft

Kyro - get the terminology right - they are not 'driving lamps' I suspect your referring to the BA series? These are non ADR'ed slip-throughs. For you, you can ignore the change in rule.


Steffo writes:
The VX-VY SS Commodore, but not the HSV products of same, were supplied with lamps, made in South Korea, that on 'supplied evidence' to then FORS suggested Compliance. The lamps do NO bear UNECE Compliance markings NOR do they bear FMVSS108 markings.

They were discontinued and so complaints from this source reduce as the cars die off. They should not have been permitted, rem though FORS (DOTARS) does not automatically test all supplied 'evidence'.


"Sidelights" in ADR and mothercode UNECE-speak - are "Sidelights-Position Lamps". Basically on a 12 volt system, are the 5 watt 'parkers' as Aussies call em.

They are a mandatory rule. The key 'reason' why these exist AND why they operate *always* - when the headlight switch is on low or high beam, is to serve as a backup signal to oncoming traffic that your low-beam has died, - SO that traffic on approach, or as you approach the rear of another at night - can still see your cars edge-outline. This reduces offset collisions.

So sorry, no out there.

The BA's so called 'decorative lamps' are also 5watts, just like the parkers located at headlight level. An ADR issued arose owing 'grouping' of lamps etc. You'd have not been able to legally fit both extra driving lamps or front fogs! All fixed now.

so what your trying to say is that the FORTARS are in compliance with the FUBARS who are dissagreeing with the BHRADDS but when overlookes by the HDGF commision all fog lights (FJFOWCKOWROGOB) are illegal if used in the day, as per the EOTMSJFKPGKPSOKJGJSOVPVAJR)AQ{KD{PAK{ aggreement???