hey-
when i was trying to track down the source of my
non-functional dash lights on my '68 hardtop a couple
weeks ago (stupid corroded rheostat), i seem to
remember that the dash lights, brake lights and tail
lights all had different fuses marked off on the box,
which seems to be consistent with the wiring diagram
for the '67s.
i took a quick glance at the fulltext of the fmvss reg
for vehicle lighting:
[http://fmvss108.tripod.com/fmvss108text.htm]
but i didn't see anything explicitly stipulating how
the tailights were to be wired, and couldn't really
make heads or tails of the standards for
'photometrics'. my guess is they either took the
wiring standards out at some point [or i missed
them...], or the 'photometric' standards dictated the
loss of the inside bulb's second filament. maybe some
brave soul with a penchant for legalese and physics
could extrapolate something from this mess?
take it easy,
--jason
jason reizner
chicago
68 crown hardtop
>Hi All,
> It came to me last night... something >vaguely
familiar was rattling around in my head >(along with
all the other rubbish) - was '68 the >year that they
put the tail lamps on the same >circuit (fuse) as the
dash lights? It seems that >I recall that that was a
FMVSS (or whatever it >was in 1968) requirement, and
that '68 was the >approximate timeframe?
>
>The rationale was that if your tail lights were >out
you would at least notice that you didn't >have dash
lights, and investigate.
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
SBC Yahoo! DSL - Now only $29.95 per month!
http://sbc.yahoo.com
Back to the Home of the Forward Look Network