1-24-05 I am new to IML. I own a '74 Imperial LeBarron 4 door hard top and a '72 Newport Royal 4 door. Norm --- List Server <mailing-list-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > This is the digest version of the Imperial Mailing > List. To receive messages individually, send an > email to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx with the > following in the body of your message: > > set mode standard mailing-list > > To unsubscribe entirely, visit: > http://imperialclub.com/IML-Specific/unsubscribe.htm > > If you have been switched to digest mode without > your consent and you want to know why, visit: > http://imperialclub.com/IML-Specific/autodigest.htm > > > | > | > | > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ > ~~~~IML DIGEST~~~~~~~~~~~~~~MESSAGE > SEPARATOR~~~~~~~~~~~~ > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ > | > | > | > > Date: Thu, 20 Jan 2005 14:21:48 -0500 > From: JosephStil@xxxxxxx > Subject: Re: IML: I haven't seen these before... > Reply-To: mailing-list@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > Wow! Now THAT was interesting. > > Shall I send the pic directly to Chris or have it > posted to the site? > > Anyone's thoughts? > > Don't know which way to turn, in Allen, Texas... > > In a message dated 1/19/2005 11:16:56 PM Eastern > Standard Time, Christopher Hoffman > <imperial67@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes: > > >The laws regarding side markers were kinda funny. > They were part of the > >sweeping FMVSS 108 (the Federal Motor Vehicle > Safety Standard that phased in > >everything from collapsible steering columns and > seat belts to padded > >interior surfaces, head restraints and recessed > interior door handles, most > >of which came into production between 1967 and > 1969). > > > >In 1968 and 1969, either reflectors or illuminated > side markers were > >required. Chrysler Corp was the only automaker to > do lights without > >reflectors and then reflectors without lights > nearly corporate-wide in 1968 > >and 1969 respectively (meaning the 1969 version was > the cheaper approach... > >Imperials were unique among Mopars in having the > shark-gill front lamps > >combining side marker lights and cornering lights > but without reflectors). > >Most GM and Ford products added front lamps and > rear reflectors for 1968, > >while most imports tended to both starting that > year. > > > >For model year 1970, the law was clearer, requiring > both. There remains no > >law to this day that requires turn signals to be > visible from the side, > >however... a ridiculous oversight in my opinion but > typical of our poorly > >thought-out lighting laws that still allow one bulb > to handle the brake > >lamps, rear turn signals and taillamps under a red > lens. To me, it's even > >more ironic to see advanced lighting technology > like LEDs used to produce > >lighting no better at communicating a driver's > intentions than lights did 50 > >years ago. But I digress... off the soap box, > boy... > > > >Anyway, there are cars that use the front side > markers to double as > >side-visible turn signals, including a few Mopars > starting in the late 1980s > >with, of all models, the antiquated Jeep Grand > Wagoneer (Grand Cherokees > >still have this feature). It's a great feature > accomplished entirely by the > >wiring setup, meaning it adds a benefit at > virtually no cost. (If anyone > >wants to know how to wire their side markers to > double as turn signals, > >email me privately. I've converted a number of my > cars to do this.) I think > >the '90s Imperials might have been the first to do > this, but owners of those > >can tell me if Chrysler even bothered. It was > common not to do this on cars > >with cornering lights standard, so it might not > have been included on any > >Imperial. > > > >If Joe's '61 has these, they pre-date even > Chrysler's use of their signature > >fender-mounted turn signals, which were visible in > most cases to both the > >driver and a parallel driver in an adjacent lane, > which means someone added > >them. Their first use on an Imperial was in 1967 > (also the first year for > >cornering lamps), though I think C-bodies offered > them as early as the 1965 > >body change. The unusual aspect of the 1967-68 > design is that there were no > >turn-signal indicator lamps on the dash (you know, > the little green arrows), > >so the fender-top indicators are all there is. But > since they were standard > >on all Imperials in those years (and I think every > year thereafter through > >the 1978 NYBs), I guess they figured the lights in > the dash were not > >necessary. But even Road Test magazine comments on > how hard they were to see > >in bright sunlight,a nd the original relay was > rather quiet, too. Lesser > >Mopars had both (dash and fender-top) because the > fender-mounted turn > >signals were optional, usually part of the basic > option package A01 (and > >after 1968, Imperials shared basic > instrument-cluster designs with > >lower-level Chryslers). > > > >I'd guess someone added them to this car from > another car, maybe another > >Chrysler. Joe, got any pix? I could probably ID > their origin for you (send > >it privately). Are they on the sides of the front > fenders or on top? Either > >way, no country required them this early, so I > would imagine one of your > >car's prior owners added them. > > > >OK, long story, so that's all for now! > > > >-- > >Chris in LA > >67 Crown > >78 NYB Salon > > > > > > > > > > > >On 1/19/05 6:44 pm, Mark Evans (evansma@xxxxxxxxxx) > wrote: > > > >> I'm having trouble imagining what they look like. > Kinda like some European > >> cars had in the 70's? Sounds like an aftermarket > add-on though. I don't know > >> of any dealer option for something like that. > But, I'll never say "never". > >> > >> Side marker lights are pretty interesting though. > I haven't read the rules. > >> But, in 1968, Chrysler put the famous "bullet" > lights on the sides of their > >> cars. In '69, they were reflectors. And, they > were illuminated again in '70. > >> I don't know of any Chrysler side markers that > worked with the turn signals > >> though. > >> > >> Mark Evans > >> 1963 Imperial Crown Convertible > > > > > > > >----------------- ?http://www.imperialclub.com > ?----------------- > >This message was sent to you by the Imperial > Mailing List. Please > >reply to mailing-list@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx and your > response will be > >shared with everyone. Private messages (and > attachments) for the > >Administrators should be sent to > webmaster@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > >To UN-SUBSCRIBE, go to > http://imperialclub.com/unsubscribe.htm > > > === message truncated === __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail - 250MB free storage. Do more. Manage less. http://info.mail.yahoo.com/mail_250 ----------------- http://www.imperialclub.com ----------------- This message was sent to you by the Imperial Mailing List. Please reply to mailing-list@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx and your response will be shared with everyone. Private messages (and attachments) for the Administrators should be sent to webmaster@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To UN-SUBSCRIBE, go to http://imperialclub.com/unsubscribe.htm