Text 14810, 97 rader
Skriven 2005-10-16 10:38:00 av Michiel van der Vlist (2:280/5555)
     Kommentar till en text av Roy Witt (1:1/22)
Ärende: looters in NO
=====================
Hello Roy,

 MV>>>> I would be surprised if you did not have something similar.

 >>> Be surprised, then.. I had to look this one up as I did not
 >>> know for sure, but our taillights are generally 27 watts
 >>> each to begin with.

 MvdV>> But... that would be blinding in clear weather.... :-(

 > Ray has probably mistaken the 27/7 rating for these bulbs as
 > their normal wattage while in use.

Plus that he mixid up "tail light" and "brake light". yes we yoo have these
dual filament bulbs where the same light serves as the rear light and the brake
light.

 > It's actually the maximum wattage they'll withstand.

All the bulbs here are labeleed !2 Volts XX watts. That would suggest the
Wattages is when 12 Volts is applied. Whle driving that could be significantly
more as the voltage will be higher. Up to 14 Volts...

 > These light bulbs are a #2057 or 3157, which are dual filament
 > bulbs. They're rated at 7 watts maximum while being used as a
 > taillight, but are rated at 27 watts maximum total when the bulb
 > is also used as a brake or turn signal light.

Combining turm signal lights with brake lights is very rare here. You only see
it on old American cars. My father's Ford Mainline had it. But that was ages
ago... European cars have separate amber turn signal lighths. The tail and
brake lights are red.

 > The brake light is 20 watts maximum, while the tail
 > light remains on at 7 watts maximum.

Well, that is more or less the same as it is here then.

 MvdV>> Wow, that is a heavy fog. Very rare here.

 > I've driven in worse fog than that. No visibility beyond the
 > hood. I was lucky and fell in behind a semi-trailer combo.
 > He was travelling at 70mph in dense fog

That sounds very dangerous. If he was above the fog, he could see where he was
going, but could not see low objects blocking the raod. Ojects such as a
Camaro....

 > and I tailgated him, riding his taillights all the way from
 > Fresno, CA to the Grapevine, which is a mountainous area just
 > north of Los Angeles. Apparently, there was no fog where he
 > sat, but there was plenty looking out of the VW windshield
 > I was driving.

If the fog was as dense as you suggest and you could make out his tail lights,
you were much to close to him at 110 km/h I'd say...

 >>> Fog lights to us are forward-facing and used in conjunction
 >>> with headlights. Mine, for example are a halogen-beam with a
 >>> flat pattern rather than the slightly more dispersed beam of
 >>> the regular halogen headlights.

 MvdV>> Those were quit popular in the past here too. But with
 MvdV>> ever more crowding of the roads their popularity has
 MvdV>> dwindled. They are no good if there is someone driving
 MvdV>> in front of you, and over here having the road to
 MvdV>> yourself is rare.

 > They're used with or without fog here.

Over here they officially may be used only when the main headlights are off...

 MvdV>> I am starting to wonder you aren't using a different
 MvdV>> definition of "Watt" from ours. They must be almost blind
 MvdV>> if people can not see the standard 21 Watt reverse light...

 > They're rated at 27 watts, but that doesn't mean they use that
 > much power.

Right. All a matter of labelling then. Over here they are labelled 12 Volts, 21
Watts. Looks like that is the same as your labelled 27 Watts. (At 14 Volts...)

 > Most bulbs of that category are also rated by amperage. and
 > 1.2 amps means the bulb is using 15 watts at 13 volts.

I am familiar with those formulas, I am a HAM remember. ;-)

 > If you're getting maximum voltage at the taillight socket, 14vdc,
 > then your 1.2amp bulb will be using 17 watts.

The current is not a constant. When the applied voltage is increased, the
current will also increase....

Cheers, Michiel

---
 * Origin: http://www.vlist.nodelist.org (2:280/5555)