Originally Posted By: simple_simon
Originally Posted By: wrcsixeight
Perhaps instead of preventing well engineered lighting into the market, they should prosecute the people and suppliers of illegal HID lighting "upgrades".
And perhaps you should learn what "for offroad use only" means before calling something illegal and trying to prosecute for it.
"Off road use only" isn't necessarily a get-out-of-jail-free card. Consider the following enforcement action, which ultimately compelled "Panda Power" to recall its junk products:
https://www.federalregister.gov/articles...l-noncompliance
Quote:
In their petition, Panda Power argues that the noncompliance is inconsequential to motor vehicle safety for the following reasons: (1) The HID headlamp kits were originally intended for sale to the agricultural community to be placed on tractors and combines, for off-road vehicles, and for exhibition purposes; (2) the HID bulbs that were sold with the kits in 2007 and 2008 are likely burned out by now and no longer functioning; and (3) Panda Power no longer sells the HID headlamp kits.
Quote:
NHTSA'S Analyses: Panda Power argues that the noncompliance is inconsequential to motor vehicle safety, primarily, because the kits were originally intended for sale to the agricultural community and to be placed on tractors and combines, or for off-road vehicles, or for exhibition purposes. NHTSA reviewed the Office Activity file for the original investigation with Panda Power. Excerpts from Panda Powers Web site, dated June 24, 2009, clearly indicate that these items are intended for motor vehicle headlamps. The site displays pictures of numerous passenger cars (e.g., Mercedes Benz, Lexus, Toyota, and Mitsubishi), references other motor vehicles (e.g., BMW), provides a link to Sylvania's replacement bulb guide for motor vehicles, and provides pictures of beam patterns as seen on roadways. It also provides troubleshooting tips for installations on motor vehicles containing daytime running lamps and how to stop lamp flicker when hitting bumps in the road. Because of this information, we find that Panda Powers claim that they sold these items for non-road use to be disingenuous.
My personal comment: I think it's laughable that a company who presumably wanted consumers to believe that it was selling legitimate and high quality products retreats, when faced with an enforcement action, to an argument of, "oh no, that was 5 years ago; our junk is long dead by now!"