Installed the ApexClone kit.
- Thread starter Audi Junkie
- Start date
- Status
That is the only reason why I stay away from hid kits in halogen housing. The pic above explains it all and I bet it's even worst if you are approaching. It's going to be a matter of time before someone gets hit by another car because of these hid kits. Until people put them in CORRECT retrofits...I will continue to turn my lights on bright too. What is the old saying, you get what you pay for...
The pattern is the same as w/ the halogens.
The light pattern in the 2nd picture is similar to my '00 MB E430 with halogen bulbs, and this car has E-code headlights which is supposed to have good pattern, a lot less glare compares with most cars on the road.
Last edited:
Audi Junkie...
Only way to set this straight is to have someone drive your car, and you in another to see if there are any glare issues. (I think it will be fine!)
Only way to set this straight is to have someone drive your car, and you in another to see if there are any glare issues. (I think it will be fine!)
A little OT - I didn't think much of the lighting from my first car with its 7" rounds (35w sealed halogens). With my second vehicle with it's 9005/9006 combination in a '95 Volvo, well it's left me disappointed. Fresh bulbs and re-aiming hasn't helped much, but I think over the years I've grown to live with it. I remember the first few weeks of night driving I was a bit freaked out about the difference.
Are these lights really that much safer as compared to how "attractive" they look over the old standards? I'm still wonder from time to time about how I might tastefully convert to "old school" units. Oh well.
Are these lights really that much safer as compared to how "attractive" they look over the old standards? I'm still wonder from time to time about how I might tastefully convert to "old school" units. Oh well.
The price allows you to try it, and if you don't like it, nbd.
'It doesn't look like it had glare' isn't really a quantitative conclusion. There are many more aspects to glare than 'looks'. There is beam intensity, reflection (unwanted/wanted) from many different angles at many different elevations and many other evaluative aspects involved.
More light is not always safer. Whiter light doesn't mean brighter light. Correct lighting is putting the light where it is supposed to be without going anywhere its not.
Rest assured any HID bulb in a meant for halogen enclosure will produce glare and is not safe.
If your headlamps are not adequate do to age/deterioration then consider getting aux driving lamps from a reputable company with proper design ie, Hella, Cibie...(PIAA is trash.) and use when safe and needed.
More light is not always safer. Whiter light doesn't mean brighter light. Correct lighting is putting the light where it is supposed to be without going anywhere its not.
Rest assured any HID bulb in a meant for halogen enclosure will produce glare and is not safe.
If your headlamps are not adequate do to age/deterioration then consider getting aux driving lamps from a reputable company with proper design ie, Hella, Cibie...(PIAA is trash.) and use when safe and needed.
Last edited:
Ironically a responce of critcism based on that fact of no proof to back it up. Though the criticism has the same problem itself.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fallacy_of_many_questions
Complex question
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
(Redirected from Fallacy of many questions)
Jump to: navigation, search
Complex question, trick question, multiple question or plurium interrogationum (Latin, "of many questions") is a question that has a presupposition (proposition that is presumed to be acceptable to the respondent when the question is asked, so that the respondent becomes committed to this proposition when he gives any direct answer) that is complex (meaning that the presupposition is a conjunctive proposition, a disjunctive proposition or a conditional proposition, or perhaps another type of proposition that contains some logical connective in a way that makes it have several parts that are component propositions).[1]
Complex questions can, but don't have to be fallacious, as in being an informal fallacy.[1]
Contents
* 1 Implied question
* 2 Complex question fallacy
o 2.1 Similar questions and fallacies
* 3 Notes
[edit] Implied question
One form of misleading discourse is where something is presupposed and implied without being said explicitly, by phrasing it as a question. For example, the question "Does Mr. Jones have a brother in the army?" does not claim that he does, but implies that there must be at least some indication that he does, or the question would not need to be asked.[2] The person asking the question is thus protected from accusations of making false claims, but still manages to make the implication in the form of a hidden compound question. The fallacy isn't in the question itself, but rather in the listener's assumption that the question would not have been asked without some evidence to support the supposition. This example seems harmless, but consider: "Does Mr. Jones have a brother in jail?"
In order to have the desired effect, the question must imply something uncommon enough not to be asked without some evidence to the fact. For example, the question "Does Mr. Jones have a brother?" would not cause the listener to think there must be some evidence that he does, since this form of general question is frequently asked with no foreknowledge of the answer.
[edit] Complex question fallacy
The complex question fallacy, or many questions fallacy, relies upon context for its effect: the fact that a question presupposes something does not in itself make the question fallacious. In other words, a presupposition by itself, doesn't have to be a fallacy. It is committed when someone asks a question that presupposes something that has not been proven or accepted by all the people involved.[1][3][4][5][6] For example, "Is Mary wearing a blue or a red dress" - with an assumption that Mary is wearing a dress - is likely non-fallacious, if it is common knowledge that Mary wears dresses. Only when some of these presuppositions are not necessarily agreed to by the person who is asked the question and are intended to trick them into replying in a way they wouldn't do if the question was simple, does the argument containing them become fallacious.[1][4][5][6]
Hence we can distinguish between:
* legitimately complex questions (not a fallacy): A question that assumes something that the hearer would readily agree to. For example, "Who is the Queen of the United Kingdom?" assumes that there is a place called the United Kingdom and that it has a queen, both true.
* illegitimately complex question: On the other hand, "Who is the King of France?" would commit the complex question fallacy because while it assumes there is a place called France (true), it also assumes it has a king (false). But since this answering the question does not seem to incriminate or otherwise embarrass the speaker, it is complex but not really a loaded question.[7]
When a complex question contains controversial presupposes (often with loaded language - having an unspoken and often emotive implication), it is known as a loaded question.[3][4][6] For example, a classical loaded question, containing incriminating assumptions that the questioned persons seem to admit to if they answer the questions instead of challenging them, is: "Did you stop beating your wife?" A loaded question may be asked to trick the respondent into admitting something that the questioner believes to be true, and which may in fact be true. So the previous question is "loaded," whether or not the respondent has actually beaten his wife. It should be noted that the very same question may be loaded in one context, but not in the other. For example the previous question would not be loaded if it was asked during a trial in which the defendant has already admitted to beating his wife.[4]
[edit] Similar questions and fallacies
A similar fallacy is the double-barreled question. It is committed when someone asks a question that touches upon more than one issue, yet allows only for one answer.[8][9][10]
This fallacy can be also confused with begging the question,[11] which offers a premise no more plausible than, and often just a restatement of, the conclusion.[12]
Complex question
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
(Redirected from Fallacy of many questions)
Jump to: navigation, search
Complex question, trick question, multiple question or plurium interrogationum (Latin, "of many questions") is a question that has a presupposition (proposition that is presumed to be acceptable to the respondent when the question is asked, so that the respondent becomes committed to this proposition when he gives any direct answer) that is complex (meaning that the presupposition is a conjunctive proposition, a disjunctive proposition or a conditional proposition, or perhaps another type of proposition that contains some logical connective in a way that makes it have several parts that are component propositions).[1]
Complex questions can, but don't have to be fallacious, as in being an informal fallacy.[1]
Contents
* 1 Implied question
* 2 Complex question fallacy
o 2.1 Similar questions and fallacies
* 3 Notes
[edit] Implied question
One form of misleading discourse is where something is presupposed and implied without being said explicitly, by phrasing it as a question. For example, the question "Does Mr. Jones have a brother in the army?" does not claim that he does, but implies that there must be at least some indication that he does, or the question would not need to be asked.[2] The person asking the question is thus protected from accusations of making false claims, but still manages to make the implication in the form of a hidden compound question. The fallacy isn't in the question itself, but rather in the listener's assumption that the question would not have been asked without some evidence to support the supposition. This example seems harmless, but consider: "Does Mr. Jones have a brother in jail?"
In order to have the desired effect, the question must imply something uncommon enough not to be asked without some evidence to the fact. For example, the question "Does Mr. Jones have a brother?" would not cause the listener to think there must be some evidence that he does, since this form of general question is frequently asked with no foreknowledge of the answer.
[edit] Complex question fallacy
The complex question fallacy, or many questions fallacy, relies upon context for its effect: the fact that a question presupposes something does not in itself make the question fallacious. In other words, a presupposition by itself, doesn't have to be a fallacy. It is committed when someone asks a question that presupposes something that has not been proven or accepted by all the people involved.[1][3][4][5][6] For example, "Is Mary wearing a blue or a red dress" - with an assumption that Mary is wearing a dress - is likely non-fallacious, if it is common knowledge that Mary wears dresses. Only when some of these presuppositions are not necessarily agreed to by the person who is asked the question and are intended to trick them into replying in a way they wouldn't do if the question was simple, does the argument containing them become fallacious.[1][4][5][6]
Hence we can distinguish between:
* legitimately complex questions (not a fallacy): A question that assumes something that the hearer would readily agree to. For example, "Who is the Queen of the United Kingdom?" assumes that there is a place called the United Kingdom and that it has a queen, both true.
* illegitimately complex question: On the other hand, "Who is the King of France?" would commit the complex question fallacy because while it assumes there is a place called France (true), it also assumes it has a king (false). But since this answering the question does not seem to incriminate or otherwise embarrass the speaker, it is complex but not really a loaded question.[7]
When a complex question contains controversial presupposes (often with loaded language - having an unspoken and often emotive implication), it is known as a loaded question.[3][4][6] For example, a classical loaded question, containing incriminating assumptions that the questioned persons seem to admit to if they answer the questions instead of challenging them, is: "Did you stop beating your wife?" A loaded question may be asked to trick the respondent into admitting something that the questioner believes to be true, and which may in fact be true. So the previous question is "loaded," whether or not the respondent has actually beaten his wife. It should be noted that the very same question may be loaded in one context, but not in the other. For example the previous question would not be loaded if it was asked during a trial in which the defendant has already admitted to beating his wife.[4]
[edit] Similar questions and fallacies
A similar fallacy is the double-barreled question. It is committed when someone asks a question that touches upon more than one issue, yet allows only for one answer.[8][9][10]
This fallacy can be also confused with begging the question,[11] which offers a premise no more plausible than, and often just a restatement of, the conclusion.[12]
A bit of light reading:
http://www.lrc.rpi.edu/programs/transportation/vehicle.asp?section=13.1
http://www.lrc.rpi.edu/programs/transportation/vehicle.asp?section=13.1
I'll be the final judge of the lighting I installed in MY car.
So far, not a single flashback and the look perfect, from MY perspective, which is what matters.
So far, not a single flashback and the look perfect, from MY perspective, which is what matters.
Originally Posted By: Audi Junkie
I'll be the final judge of the lighting I installed in MY car.
So far, not a single flashback and the look perfect, from MY perspective, which is what matters.
That is about as selfish as one can get.
Trust me your arrogant outlook only solidifies my point that you have zero concern for the well being of other drivers.
Your car came with a halogen reflector housing and was in no way designed for HID's. Everyone and their mother can claim the cutoff is really good for a reflector. You are just using false reasoning to justify your idiocy.
Good luck with breaking DOT laws.
I'll be the final judge of the lighting I installed in MY car.
So far, not a single flashback and the look perfect, from MY perspective, which is what matters.
That is about as selfish as one can get.
Trust me your arrogant outlook only solidifies my point that you have zero concern for the well being of other drivers.
Your car came with a halogen reflector housing and was in no way designed for HID's. Everyone and their mother can claim the cutoff is really good for a reflector. You are just using false reasoning to justify your idiocy.
Good luck with breaking DOT laws.
Yawn.
Apparently, there is no problem, except the one inside your head.
Apparently, there is no problem, except the one inside your head.
If your perspective is looking at your car from 50 feet away, remember that it's not the same as that of oncoming traffic. Try this experiment,if you haven't already done so. Swap cars with a friend, drive a mile apart on an unlit two lane road and see what it looks like. If there really is no glare, then you've done a good job. A photo of the lights shining against a wall showing a sharp cutoff would also help to quiet the disbelievers, of which, I must admit, I am one.
I want to do this on my motorcycle.
Interesting thread title. I'm pretty sure it's Apexcone.com. As in, when you do a track day, the instructors put a cone at the inside apex of of the corners until the newcomers learn the track. I think this is a website started by (or associated with) a guy named Jim Powell, a bmw enthusiast who has also posted a number of good bmw related DIYs on the web.
Interesting thread title. I'm pretty sure it's Apexcone.com. As in, when you do a track day, the instructors put a cone at the inside apex of of the corners until the newcomers learn the track. I think this is a website started by (or associated with) a guy named Jim Powell, a bmw enthusiast who has also posted a number of good bmw related DIYs on the web.
Thanks for the 411 to all on this kit. I installed on H-4 lamps and they are great. I got the dual filament option with 35watt bulbs. I aimed the lamps on the road and I must say it helps overall vs. higher wattage bulbs. I do worry about one thing and that is the ballast.
They generally fail within a year. I heard some testimony that they last longer but, that is a major issue with durability with all retro kits in general. I will probably buy a set for 9006/9005 also.
They generally fail within a year. I heard some testimony that they last longer but, that is a major issue with durability with all retro kits in general. I will probably buy a set for 9006/9005 also.
Last edited:
- Status
