Tail light Conversion

Is it possible to pick up European Code tail lights for an 04 Town and
Country and install them in a North American vehicle with just some minor
changes to the wires and bulb holders? I'm headed for Italy and would pick
up a pair if this is possible. Remember, by 04 the North American version
has just one bulb plus backup bulb. Thanks.

Richard.

 

The taillamp clusters themselves will fit. The single-bulb
tail/stop/turn setup in your 2004 means you will need to do some
rewiring. It's not all that difficult to do if the 2004 wiring setup is
the same one Chrysler's been using for years on their vehicles with
single-bulb tail/stop/turn setups: You need to cut the wire that runs
from the brake lamp switch to the turn signal switch. The existing
brake lamp wires then become your turn signal wires, and you run a new
wire from the brake lamp switch side of the cut wire to the rear of the
vehicle, to power the brake lamps. Make it a nice 14ga wire and you can
hook up both the factory brake and factory rear-fog lamps in the
European-code taillamps to act as brake lamps (spend another couple
minutes and add a diode or two and you can have a rear fog *and* quad
brake lamps).

While you're over there, why not get the good headlamps, too?

 

If I get these (if a dealer in Rome has them in stock, or if I find them
at a local Roman junk yard, ha,) I will wire in one of the rear fog lights
while I'm at it. Would all you nice newsgroup people please start up a fund
to help me pay for all those nice parts?

Richard.

 

Why not just sell it and buy one over there?

Ted

 

Perhaps it's because he's only *visiting* over there, I donno, on a
vacation or somesuch, and wishes better lighting on his minivan when he
returns home.

 

Exactly right. I just wish Mr. Stern was more successful at getting the
government in Canada to mandate better lighting.

Richard.

 

FMVSS should demand this:

All lighting on a vehicle should be on at ALL times... when driving that is.

I see far too many people in the rain, during the day, no lights on...
(other than DRL). what's up with that??

I use my rear fogs in adverse conditions... that's why my bumper has no
damage (Volvo)

 

These rear fogs sound like a great idea. Are they like tail lights only
brighter?

Are they required in all European Countries, or only Germany?

-Kirk Matheson

 

Rear fogs are allowed in North America and several import vehicles have them
here. I understand that just one bright red rear segment pm the left rear is
best but both sides lit is permitted here and many if not most imports with
rear fogs sport that arrangement.

Richard.

 

The government in Canada doesn't need convincing. They (or "he", more
accurately, i.e. the Canadian regulator in charge of motor vehicle
lighting and reflective devices) is fully aware that red rear turn
signals are dumb. He knows there should be less glare from low beams
and DRLs. He knows side turn signal repeaters should be on every car.
He knows the value of a rear fog lamp. He knows there ought to be
stringent standards for front fog lamps' performance, mounting and
installation. The problem is with the Americans! Remember, the North
American Auto Pact of 1965 effectively locked Canada into line with US
vehicle regulations. What differences exist are generally minor, and
it's kept that way by the US auto industry and the US DOT (specifically
NHTSA).

Canada was looking at accepting all ECE standards, as well as whole ECE
vehicles. The idea passed all safety analyses (of course it would, for
the road-safest nations in the world all require or permit ECE
standards), but the automakers and US DOT hollered bloody murder about
it. The automakers said "When we build a car for the German market,
that's where we want it to stay. We don't want it showing up in Canada.
If you do this, you'll be taking away our control over what vehicles
enter the Canadian market, and that will undermine our marketing
strategy." US DOT said "If you allow ECE, we'll be the only country in
the world doing something different." So, the idea was quashed, because
the US didn't want Canada to do it.

But, when Canada last brought up the idea of mandating amber rear turn
signals, the US auto industry threatened to take Canada to free-trade
court over it. Because of the way the "free trade" agreements of the
last four decades are written, Canada would lose.

So, there you have it. Sign "free trade" agreements with one hand to
eliminate tarrifs and monetary trade barriers, then write
different-from-the-rest-of-the-world-but-not-better technical standards
to hide trade barriers in with the right hand. There is no such a thing
as "free trade", folks.

 

Works both ways. I remember Canadian having a hissy fit over USA gas makers
not using their MTBE in gasoline.

 

That's not the same type of squabbling, that's just run-of-the-mill
"Hey, we offer the product you use, why won't you buy it from us? No
fair!" whining.

 

The problem is with the Americans! Remember, the North

But: Based on a decision by the WTO dispute panel in 2001, the Auto Pact was
abolished as the panel ruled that parts of the Canada-United States Auto
Pact broke global trade rules by favoring some countries over others. This
ended the 35-year-old centerpiece of Canada's automotive policy.

Also, someone has suggested that putting Euro Code tail lights in the 04
mini-van will throw off the electronic control system. Is this true even if
the break lights are rewired?

Richard.

 

Of course, but so what? NAFTA superceded the Auto Pact. My comments
still apply.

Of course someone suggested that. People "suggest" all kinds of stupid
crapola when they don't know what they're talking about.

 

No, The Manufactures got the US government to have a hissy fit, because
Canada used MTBE, and blamed failure's of o-rings in injectors on MTBE used
in Canada's gasoline.

 

I think you have confused MMT, i.e. Manganese Methylcyclopentadienyl
Tricarbonyl, which is a metallic octane booster, with MTBE, Methyl
Tertiary Butyl Ether, which is an oxygenate. I also think you've
confused the nature of the hissy fit you seem to recall. MTBE has been
widely used in US gasoline since the mid-1980s, while MMT was severely
restricted and subsequently banned in the US in the late 1980s. MMT,
however, was widely used in Canadian gasoline until just a couple of
years ago. That is because when Environment Canada attempted to ban it,
on the sound basis of its deleterious effect on auto exhaust toxicity
and emission control device longevity and effectiveness, the US company
that made most of the MMT, Ethyl Corporation, sued Canada in Free Trade
Court -- and won, despite the similarly-based US ban on MMT in
gasoline.

Ethyl Corp, of course, is the company that makes most of the world's
Tetraethyl Lead, i.e., lead additive for gasoline. They have a long
history of behaving just like a tobacco company.