Hmnnn. Guess I'll have to revise my thinking on the back-up lights. O, well.
;>)

"Matt B." <noway (AT) hellno (DOT) com> wrote

My Fox doesn't have fog lamps. But my Chevy Blazer does. They are pointed
upward. They hit average treetop level (30-40ft) at around 200 yds. Can't
adjust them any lower. One is brand new including the housing and its
correspoding height adjustment screw.
--
Jonny

"Bert Hyman" <bert (AT) iphouse (DOT) com> wrote

I can't say about current models, but...

Both of my '87 Sciroccos have the wiring and sockets for the fog light
position. There's no hole in the position which corrosponds to them in the
tail light housing, though it is marked out where it should be. So, I cut them
open, put in another set of parking (not brake) light bulbs, and now rather
than the normal 3" or 4" square tail lights I've got what amounts to
double-wide ones. The fog light postion, despite having the same bulb as the
parking light, appears somewhat brighter. Perhaps the lense/reflector in that
section is formed differently. What I really like about this is that I've not
only got twice the area worth of tail lights than I had before, but if one goes
out, I've still got an active tail light on each side.

The car has been inspected three times since I did this, by three different
shops. Nobody ever complained about them, and one time I actually got pulled
over because one of my tail lights (one of these) was out the trooper (state
police here in Mass.) made no comment about them. I suppose if I'd put brake
light bulbs in there might have been issues with them. I did try a pair when I
first did this, but they looks almost (but not quite exactly) like the brake
lights. I also did a "fog" test with them. Parked the car, left the lights
on, and walked away from it. I could see the "fog" position lights somewhat
(but not a lot) further away than the others.

My '84 Scirocco also has the same un-lit section in it's tail light array, but
I don't remember of it had the sockets in the light block.

- Bill

Its absolutely true. If you rear end somebody , you will be cited for
failure to maintain a safe distance. It doesn't matter why. Nobody gets
cited for getting hit in the rear. Apparently you don't get in the real
world much. I,m absolutely in the real world. Try checking out what
everybody's doing on the freeway. Instead of driving obliviously ahead.
Yesterday morning a woman jumped on the freeway in a Jetta Wagon. , cut
over two lanes ,in front of me and slowed down. She didn't merge with
traffic, She forced traffic to merge with her. She impeded traffic, which is
illegal too. And got pissed because I stayed on her ass. And refused to
move. She slowed down more until I went around her so I could keep up with
all other traffic, which she impeded again. which was faster then her. She
was doing 50-55. Until I exited, at which time she got back over in the slow
lane. She is clearly wrong,but doesn't know the law or care. but decided to
impede me for spite. but if I hit her it will be my fault and mine alone.
That's the real world. She thinks she's right and breaks the law, I hit her
and get cited and will have to pay. Because noone gives a crap about anyone
behind them.
"Brian Running" <brunning (AT) xxtdsxx (DOT) net> wrote

"none2u" <none2u (AT) notrealatall (DOT) bye> wrote

This turns out to not be absolutely, always, true. Although it's awfully near
to being so.

I was there, passenger, with a friend where he rear-ended a car backing up an
entrance ramp onto Rte. 128 several years back. I gathered that the other guy
had missed the exit ramp, stopped just past the entrance ramp and got the
bright idea that, being it was 2:00 in the morning, nobody would ever notice if
he backed up the wrong ramp. Why, given those circumstances, he just didn't
back down the shoulder and take the exit ramp, I don't know.

Anyway, as it happened, a police cruiser was following us down the ramp (he
thought we were acting "suspiciously") and the cop saw the whole incident. The
other driver got cited, on the spot, for causing the accident. I wasn't
standing close enough to hear what he was cited for, but he was. And my friend
was not.

On the other hand, the cop did point out that it was the first time he'd ever
written up, or even heard of someone writing up, the driver of the front
vehicle in a rear ending.

He never got any points on his license and never paid any surcharges for the
accident, so I guess everyone agreed with the cop.

- Bill

((..attributions lost..))

Yea, I bet he confessed to driving backwards. And a cop just happened to be
there and was forced to cite the driver. Otherwise he would of been Scott
free. ,Your buddy would of bought the whole wreck. I have access to the
accident reports from an insurance company. Its the same story. I don't know
anybody that drives down the road and watches their rearviews as much as
their front. Or cares who they cutoff or impeded. The laws aren't enforced,
So people drive irresponsibly, because they wont be cited or have to pay.
They waste other peoples money, time , patience , gas ,and cause wrecks.
Pilots watch a lot because they are taught to scan constantly . Front
instruments, mirrors , engine gauges , controls, a whole circuit of visual
checks, then start over. . Race car drivers too. They never stop scanning .
Its work. I know a guy who was drunk and passed out, and jumped a concrete
medium, His car did a 180 . he flew in the back seat. And continued
backwards on the wrong side of the road until he crashed into a car . He
was going backwards on the wrong side of the road, and the other guy got
cited. For failure to maintain a safe distance. It later got straightened
out, but almost didn't. and justice was served, however. If you rear end
somebody, you're getting cited. Therefore inconsiderate , selfish people
take advantage of it and cause wrecks. Or block traffic.
"William J. Leary Jr." <Bill_Leary (AT) msn (DOT) com> wrote

Tell you what, None, I'm an attorney, and I've done a lot of
insurance-defense work, a large portion of which arises out of
rear-enders. If someone stops abruptly or hits the brakes hard in
circumstances in which it's negligent to do so, and it causes a
rear-ender accident, the driver of the car that gets hit will be at
fault. Hate to burst your bubble, but that's a fact, and I've argued it
to juries and gotten verdicts in my favor.

Most cops will issue citations to both drivers in that kind of accident,
which is a knee-jerk reaction by the cop. That doesn't determine
liability or trigger insurance coverage, though.

What is almost-unheard-of is for the rear-ending driver to be without
fault. There will always be contributory negligence, and the rear
driver is virtually always going to bear some of the fault.

i put a rear-fog light bulb in my driver's side taillight. it was
something fun to do one saturday and now when it's dark and raining i
just switch it on!

In article <Uep1h.25366$7I1.11062 (AT) newssvr27 (DOT) news.prodigy.net>,
Brian Running <brunning (AT) XXameritechXX (DOT) net> wrote:
What about situations that are obviously insurance scams (e.g. cut close
in front of someone, then slam on the brakes before they can back off to
a safe following distance)?

I wouldn't doubt that most drivers who rear end someone else are at
least partially at fault, since most drivers tailgate, don't pay too
much attention to driving, and don't adjust speed over hills or around
blind curves where there may be stopped traffic jams. But there seems
to be plenty of insurance fraud around.

--
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Timothy J. Lee
Unsolicited bulk or commercial email is not welcome.
No warranty of any kind is provided with this message.

In article <E0b%g.15603$o71.10060 (AT) newsread3 (DOT) news.pas.earthlink.net>,
Papa <bikingis (AT) my (DOT) fun> wrote:
In heavy fog, it allows a driver behind to see the back of your car
more easily. The rear fog lamp is brighter than the normal tail lamp.
Usually only one is used on the driver's side, because two would look
like brake lamps being used.

--
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Timothy J. Lee
Unsolicited bulk or commercial email is not welcome.
No warranty of any kind is provided with this message.