D4 high-beam alignment

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bushwanderer

Therefore the infill of the halogens may not be designed for flat terrain, but for undulating (or greater) terrain. What appears to be "shining to the heavens" (my expression) is actually designed to provide better lighting as you descend into a dip.

---

Absolutely no chance of this being the case with these faulty lights.
As for hight beam legal requirements, in NSW at least high beams must illuminate the road at least 75 metres ahead. These faulty halogens don't shine anywhere near the ground so fail miserably, but as the bi-xenons when on high beam illuminate more than this distance, the vehicle is still roadworthy.

I called LR CC today and added my vehicle to the list of D4s with faulty lights. However the dealer has to advise LR that they're faulty, which I was told had been done, so I need to confirm with the dealer just what steps they have in mind.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jesse B

Fairly obvious that the poms don't have great furry brown things leaping out in front of them at night...

---

They're just catering for tree kangaroos and possums that haven't yet jumped down from the trees.

My halogen in-fills shine a little higher than the xenons, but I never really considered it a 'fault'. Around the city they're great for seeing street names in dimly-lit streets, and give a reasonable spread out in the country, which as Peter said, the xenons don't do - makes spotting Skippy actually a little less haphazard.

Perhaps others have halogens aimed higher than mine? Mine are certainly higher than the xenons, but if they weren't, I doubt you'd even see the halogen pattern - they'd be drowned out by the xenons.

Cheers,

Gordon

Thanks Bushwanderer. I agree that 40m is not optimal but I had to work with what I could find for a projection screen in a small town. At 100m the halogen beams would have gone way over the roof of this building so would not have been visible in the photos.

I'm still looking for a screen big enough to show the beam pattern clearly from 100m but it's a bit of a challenge. The deep cuttings on the F3 would be good, but a bit tricky to set up the photos and take measurements, etc. The halogen beam appears around the top of those F3 cuttings and sometimes catches the trees above the cuttings, which is all very interesting and entertaining but not much use in practical terms. I understand what you're saying about extending the spread of light beyond the xenon pencil beams, but that's a bit more than a "dip".

Thanks also to Graeme for contacting Customer Care to help this gain some momentum. Eventually LR will realise this is something they have to look at properly. Increasing numbers of affected owners contacting them about this will make it harder for them to ignore it, so the sooner we'll see something happen.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Graeme

They're just catering for tree kangaroos and possums that haven't yet jumped down from the trees.

---

Might be a few poms that haven't jumped down outta the trees yet too... (maybe including those who designed these lights!) :wasntme:

I rang Customer Service at LRA the day before yesterday, and the nice lady rang me back yesterday (having spoken to "technical") - and then, at my request, sent me an email response to my "complaint" about the halogens. As their email demands "no dissemination" of their message I cannot quote directly, but this is a paraphrase of what was said:

"Headlamps meet LR's quality requirements, and when adjusted correctly conform to EEC and Australian Design Rules for headlamp projection angles". They went on to say that the halogens are supposed to be "in- fill" lamps, to provide additional light to areas not covered by the Xenons, and that they are "not driving lamps".

Surprise, surprise!! So, this morning I have written a three-page letter to the Customer Service Manager, including the photos I posted here (in high resolution!), and an offer to take him/her for a night drive if they wanted to come to Albany. We shall see what we shall see, but it doesn't look hopeful. It's a shame that LR would hide behind ADR compliance, especially when all sorts of rubbish cars with lousy design elements meet the same "standards"...

I guess they do cover where the Bizenons don't cover; the night sky. :Rolling:

Oh and "techical" is the same guy who said the suspension mod was illegal. :angel:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jesse B

It's a shame that LR would hide behind ADR compliance

---

I suspect that the vehicles that passed the compliance inspection were not optioned with the possum lights.

Thanks Jesse B. Can you post the address you sent your letter to? I'll write a letter as well and I'd like to make sure it goes to the same place and hopefully the same person. We're unlikely to bury the guy in a mountain of mail but we may as well create a paper trail and get noticed properly.

Hey Sniegy,
Is your vehicle fitted with the possum lights?