As far as car running lights go, they are rubbish. Look at the angle of view they disapear at on a Mercedes. It is very narrow.
This begs the question of 'why did car manufacturers change indicator light covers from amber to clear and put an amber coated bulb in there, that can't be seen in bright sunlight?'
The same goes for traffic lights. There is a traffic light controlled roundabout near here and if you are in the R/H lane, you can not see the colour of the light until the last minute, because of the angle the lights are presented to the driver. (You can't see the stop lines until the last minute either, because of the contour of the road.)
The whole thing is outrageous. Even if you accept the connection between your choice of light bulb and global warming, how come the Government lets people make their own decision about, say, air travel, but not about their choice of light bulb? It isn't as if the alternatives were exact replacements.
The alternatives to flying (car, train, buses, ships) all create more pollution than flying. They don't want you to use an alternative they just want you to pay more tax.
Is it so that the amber light cover doesn't compete with the paint colour? That's important, you know. Also so that when the coating eventually flakes off and the car fails its MOT test, there's further income from a replacement bulb.
Additionally, why do some car manufacturers (Land Rover, VW, Skoda, please take note) think it's a good idea to surround an indicator lamp with a brake lamp? I suspect it's so that the indicator is almost invisible when (as seems to be the fashion nowadays) people signal long after they've started braking. More profit from replacement bumpers, body panels, etc?
HomeOwnersHub website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here.
All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.