IIRC, there were Mustang show cars in the 60s that also used rectangular headlights. A few prototypes of the original Mustang had extended fenders with the headlights behind peaked, clear covers. And I seem to remember at least 1 Mustang Mach prototype that had rectangular headlights and side windows that were fixed in place but had little drop down panels in the “glass” for toll booths.
The vehicles still exist in what looks to be very good condition. They were in the back of a Hoovies Garage episode filmed at the Midwest Dream Cars Collection museum which is supposed to open in 2019 in Manhattan, Kansas.
The collection seems really unfocused, imho, and with a 21 year old curator and a wealthy couple directing and funding it, the question is open as to its long term success…
Actually, I’m suspicious that the headlights came off of a Kenworth truck. Obviously the sealed beams themselves are standard, but most cars didn’t leave gaps in the trim to get at the screws for easy replacement or to adjust the aim.
It’s a bit awkward, but given how highly customized it already is, I doubt it’s really hurting the value much.
Believe me, in the 1976 antique car hobby, this was not just “a 30 year old Lincoln”. Continentals thru 1948 are considered classics by the Classic Car Club of America. Whoever did this one, if it was done back then, wouldn’t have had the balls to take it anywhere near an antique car show.
I watched the equivalent at a Hudson show once. The guy with the hot rodded step-down Hornet was told in no uncertain, definitely impolite, terms to get that piece of shit off the field.
I almost always like the 4 round light look. Especially on European cars that had an aero type in it’s home country, but had to adapt to ‘Merica. Mercedes SLs and Mk1 Capris come to mind. Some cars like the ’81-’87 Grand Prix look great with square quads. But I have been told I am weird. Ruggedly handsome, yes, but also weird. And humble. Super-duper humble. And I try really hard not to act pretentious…
The fact that so many European cars were also built for export to the US still constrained their designers, even if they used rectangular lights in global markets. That, plus the long design cycles, mean that only in the 90s did we start to see designs that were truly unconstrained by the form factors defined by the old sealed beams.
If the 69 Coronet wasn’t mean enough looking already! That angry face would put the tail between the legs of every modern aggressive front end in existence.
One thing I will always give the restrictive regulations though, it kept designer’s one their toes. I can concede that body shapes across brands and companies could often resemble each other for a given year, but front ends were always very easy to tell one car from another, despite most cars sharing those components. Once flush headlamps came along they were hamstrung(and motivated by) aerodynamics and inexplicably ended up more homogeneous looking in design for a given model than universal sealed beams.
The Mustang II is another American car that I feel was designed for square headlights, as mentioned Mustangs concepts throughout the 60s sported them so it would seem natural to include them on the totally reimagined 74. The square bezels around round singles they used seemed to be stopgap measure for an update that never came to fruition.
Also the one year wonder 1965 Fairlane, which had been discussed here. That rather out of place front end makes so much more sense (and probably look better) if it had pioneered square headlights, but because that never happened it looks completely out of place in the 1965 lineup
I always felt that the 65 Fairlane with it’s large rectangular bezels for small round headlights was a feeble attempt at mimicing the 65 Galaxie. (Same idea, but one is vertically oriented while the other is horizontally oriented.)
My alternative theory is that someone switches the designs for the 65 Comet and Fairlane. The Fairlane and big Mercurys both had horizontal headlights while the Comet and big Fords both had vertical headlamps.
BTW, the 74-81 Camaro had rectangular turnsignals in front next to headlight buckets that looked like they could easily have been modified for square headlights. Of course it would also have involved tweaking the shape of the forward edge of the front fenders and hood. Pontiac put rectangular headlights on the Firebird, but Chevy never bothered to spend the money on the Camaro.
I recommend reading through the comment chain starting with Don Andreina‘s comment with this attachment, my theory is elaborated on more in my posts, but in summary Ford had made a legitimate attempt at getting European square headlamps legalized for the 1965 Ford’s, but abandoned the idea after legal hurdles squashed it. They go on to talk about how the Comet wound up with stacked headlamps(as 65 big Fords used) but with conflicting recollections I actually suspect the car that had fenders too far along to switch to stacks was the Fairlane(still slated for the would-be corporate European headlamps) and not the Comet, which could have easily carried on with the one year only 64 skin.
It’s really hard to tell what American cars might have looked like simply because they were styled around the headlight shapes that were available at the time. The round quad lights were approved for 1957, quad rectangulars for 1975 and GM went whole hog on single rectangulars for its new A-bodies in 1978.
The way to tell how different things might have been is to look at how styling changed when the restrictions were lifted in the 1980’s. The 1984 Lincoln Mark VII was the first with integrated lights, and it’s clear sealed beams would not work in their place. Picture the Taurus without its trademark aero lights. Ford came out with new noses for all their cars over the ensuing years.
The SVO Mustang was clearly designed for them, but initially came out with single rectangulars. That was rectified with later models.
The Mark VII was designed to have rectangular lights as a backstop measure, like the SVO Mustang. IIRC, the aero lights were approved only about a year before production – well after the design was locked in.
Aero lights are just fine. But I miss the cost advantage of the standardized sealed beams. For a while, Ford (and some others) acknowledged this by using a special fascia for their fleet light trucks. Standard sealed beams were used in place of the aero ones used on the more expensive versions.
Replacements cost about $10 and were available everywhere. It looked cheap, but for a fleet vehicle, who cares?
Nowdays even the lowliest fleet vehicles have aero headlights with their associated increase in cost.
They don’t look cheap when the expensive E and F series equivalents all have yellowed and clouded aero lenses today, while the otherwise beat up work trucks/vans still on the job still have crystal clear sealed beams
I’ve got a fleet model Chevy pickup and prefer the clean gray plastic grille and glass sealed beam look. One disadvantage of the old glass sealed beams was that they would burn out instantly if cracked. Modern ones have a halogen capsule inside, so you have time to buy a replacement for $10 before the reflector tarnishes.
That’s one biggest advantage: I can convert them to ECE headlamps from Cibie or Hella rather than search for the obscure OEM ECE headlamps from the manufacturers let alone paying prince sum for the precious set.
My former Chevrolet Celebrity had a set of Hella ECE headlamp set, and they improved the night vision dramatically, especially for the rural road driving in Texas.
These look great, I love the 67-69 Dart hardtop body but truthfully never found the front end with the inset grille very appealing, so this is the best of both worlds and distinctive in its own right.
I’m the other way around, it may be the inset version is a grass is always greener thing, but the fact is it is one of my favourite front designs ever.
Simple and even generic maybe, but unique as well.
The Australian rectangular-headlamp Valiants would’ve looked better, in my estimation, with the 200 × 142 mm lamps (the US single-large-rectangular sealed beam size) but it didn’t yet exist when those cars were designed. The smaller 180 × 130 mm Lucas sealed-beam lamps were already in use on a variety of Brit cars (Ford Capri, Hillman Avenger, etc), and Australia—a Commonwealth country—had ready, cheap access to Lucas componentry, so.
Early separate bulb headlamps were not well sealed, so reflectors tarnished and light output suffered after a few years or less. Like today, OEM replacement lenses and reflectors may have been relatively expensive dealer-only items as well. In 1939 this was considered an advance in automotive safety. The 1957 quad lights were a recognition that at super highway speeds more high beam output might be beneficial.
But it did take a ridiculously long time for the US to lift the regulation insisting on sealed-beam headlights. They were indeed the best in 1940 but were blown away by quartz-halogen technology soon after. There were halogen sealed beams in the early 1980’s, but because the reflectors were simply spray-painted silver, they weren’t quite as effective as replaceable-bulb lights.
Tell me about it. I was running Hella H4 halogen conversions for the 7″ sealed beams back in ’73 on my Vega GT. If you did serious rallying, it was considered a minimum necessity. The factory sealed beams were absolute crap on comparison.
And then I had to pull them every six months to pass PA state inspection (I seem to remember inspections were bi-annually back then).
Who told you that? Headlamp reflectors have never been “spray-painted silver” or anything even close. The reflectors in halogen sealed beams were always the same as the reflectors in regular sealed beams: perfectly specular vapor-coated aluminum with reflectivity in the high 90s. That’s the same material used for reflectors in composite headlamps, with sometimes-adequate clear lacquer or silica topcoats to stave off dulling oxidation. No clear coat is necessary with sealed-beam construction.
And no, sealed beams were not “blown away” by quartz-halogen technology soon after 1940. That is a common mythunderstanding that conflates the technological, technical, and regulatory factors that made US headlamps different from European headlamps, and baselessly scorns US lamps as poopy while just as baselessly elevating European headlamps as awesome. The facts—the actual, real, measurable, objective ones—do not align with that simplistic and misinformed thinking.
Were most US sealed beams very unpleasant to drive with at night? Yes, they were, largely because of their minimal foreground light, which creates the uncomfortable feeling of driving without enough light. But that is a feeling, a subjective impression; it is not reality. European headlamps tended to provide a lot of foreground light, which creates the feeling (another subjective impression) of great lighting, but is useless at speeds above about 25 mph, and those same European headlamps tended to provided very minimal peak intensity on low beam.
Result: the driver is less comfortable but has greater seeing distance with a properly-aimed US sealed beam (plain or halogen), and is more comfortable but has shorter seeing distance with a properly-aimed European headlamp.
Extensive study was done all over the world over many years’ time, trying to figure out which headlamp system was superior. Most studies, no matter where they were done, came to similar conclusions: some advantages to this system or that system under these or those conditions, but no big, substantial, significant safety performance advantage to either system over the other.
That’s because low beams, whether they’re US or European type, are severely and inherently inadequate to the task we ask of them. Most of the time, most of us outdrive our low beams. The world’s best low beam, no matter what regulation it’s built to, is not adequate for road speeds above about 45 mph, tops.
Properly-implemented ADB is the solution.
TheMann
Posted November 16, 2018 at 9:39 PM
Daniel, your arguments are well supported and thoughtfully stated. Always enjoy reading your comments. And that you said poopy.
OliverTwist
Posted November 17, 2018 at 1:15 AM
I am sorry, Daniel, this is where we disagree. I earned my driver’s licence in Texas in 1982, and I did a lot of rural road driving outside Dallas. That’s where the US headlamps failed me big time. Not based on just one car but many different vehicles, including the ones from Ford.
What you didn’t mention in your comment is the inclement weather condition. The US headlamps cast too much light upward, reflecting back to me, especially in Colorado with lot of snow and fog.
As I have said many times in the previous comments (and you know it, too), I converted my Chevrolet Celebrity to ECE headlamps, which made driving less stressful at night with no street lamps and pitch black night sky in Texas and Colorado. My friends in both states had been asking me to help them obtain, fit, and align the ECE headlamps if their vehicles allowed them.
After moving back to Germany in 2006, I started to drive different vehicles on the Autobahnen and Landesstraßen where they’re not always illuminated by the street lamps. Not including the roads through the mountains (alert: snow, fog, rain at night) in the southern Germany. I see the huge difference between US and ECE headlamps even some of ECE headlamps that were considered bad. The only exception is US headlamps by Valeo fitted to second generation Dodge Intrepid: the rest of US vehicles that I drove wasn’t as good for the rural road driving or inclement weather condition.
My real world driving experience doesn’t match your newly formed opinion that ECE headlamps are bad and US headlamps are better when properly aimed. Don’t tell me how great the Ford headlamps from the 1980s! I regretted one time hiring a Ford Tempo when its headlamps didn’t cast anything out in the rural road that would allow me to drive faster than 30 mph. I avoided the certain car hire agencies that were exclusively Ford products for that reason.
I am not sure what has gotten you, Daniel, lately that you seem to focus more on studies and neat numbers or graphic representations of headlamp output rather than the real world driving experience.
If ECE headlamps were bad and US better, why did NHTSA approved the H4 (excuse me, HB2 or 9003, if you insist on proper US name) for the US market in 1991 and allowed the ECE beam with sharp cut off or Z-beam output?
Just quit with disparaging comments based on pure science rather than real world driving experience. I am sorry, but I couldn’t hold it back anymore.
Daniel Stern
Posted November 17, 2018 at 8:29 AM
Oliver, if you think I’m going to throw facts and science at your opinion-based argument, well…you’re wrong about that, too. 😉 Instead I’ll just refer you here.
This reminds me of Paul’s article from a few years ago calling the Chevelle the American Big Opel. The 2 cars really did look alike at a glance, except for the jarring difference of the wide rectangular headlights on the Opel. At first it seemed so weird and out of place, but now I feel like the round lights look strange, like they’re too small or something!
Uhm… If today’s cars are going to have such specific headlight applications, such as only fitting the car model that it is on, is it too much to ask that they be made out of real glass and not plastic that clouds from sun exposure? The bottle of Ragu spaghetti sauce that was poured on your supper came from a glass jar. The jar full of sauce costs $2. That glass jar will be thrown away, but the plastic headlight lense that costs $$$ is expected to last for the lifetime of the car which it won’t without some polishing. DUMB!
Polycarbonate lenses could be a whole lot more durable than they are, but the auto industry doesn’t want to pay for it and the regulations don’t require them to. Which is a shame, because there is a direct causal link between headlamp lens degradation and pedestrian deaths. A very adept scientist at one of the major OE suppliers of headlamps did a thorough chunk of research on the subject and presented an unbroken evidentiary chain between the one and the other: many pedestrians are dead who wouldn’t have been if headlamp lenses were still made of glass (or a material with equivalent durability).
I remember my ’87 Celebrity and ’89 Grand Prix both had glass lenses. Then I got a ’92 Mustang with plastic. At the time I thought it was a GM vs. Ford thing. Somehow it all became all plastic. Ever-larger and larger plastic lenses. Crawling up the hood and the fenders. More and more headlight area. Do they work any better now that they are enormous angry alien Transformer eyeballs? Now it is grilles. More and more grille area. Creeping up the hood and disappearing under the bumper. Surrounded by chrome. Big chrome lips encapsulating the entire grille which has encompassed the hood and fenders and then the headlights will be on the roof and then they add an entire extra front end over it all like a Nissan Juke…I am exhausted. We must stop it before all cars become absinthe-inspired Picassoed-up acid trips to hell. What say you?
Hard-costed polycarbonate is much more chip- and crack-resistant than glass. You would be replacing your headlamp assemblies more often if they were glass. Is that what you really want? Or do you usually call things “dumb” for no reason?
Oh, and UV resistance of polycarbonate lenses has been improved over time. My Ranger is almost 8 years old, is parked outside 24/7, and the headlamps are still crystal clear w/o a hint of frosting or yellowing.
I have never once seen a late 80s GM with the glass lenses cracked or noticeably chipped unless the car was in an accident. My neighbors Infinity G37 completely disagrees about the UV resistance being any better than it was 20 years ago.
No, Hardboiled Eggs and Nuts is correct. We don’t have to guess or shake our opinions at each other about it; rigorous US data show glass headlamps stayed in overall better functional condition longer than polycarbonate ones do. Of course there are specific-case exceptions of unusually weak glass and unusually durable polycarbonate, and there are certainly areas of the country where impact damage is more of a concern than UV-induced lens degradation, but overall even the best polycarbonate headlamp lenses don’t have a functional lifespan anywhere near that of the average glass lamp. Pedestrians die in significant numbers as a direct result.
Here’s an idea dreamed up by GE’s vehicle lighting engineers in the early 1960s. The notes in the technical history binder this came from are as follows: “Neither Detroit’s stylists nor GE’s manufacturing people cared for this one”.
Those could create some cool looks but I’ve got to imagine they were much more expensive to make than 2 separate round bulbs. the retaining ring would have been a pain too,
…and here are some early square sealed beams GE devised in the mid-late ’60s. The one on the right was deemed excessively square, and the rounded-square one on the left cost too much to make.
I wondered why we never got square lights only rectangular, good to see that they at least experimented with them. I think the ones with the rounded corners would have been easy to slip in and integrate with existing body lines.
The oblong headlamps on the Dodge show car in the lead pic (and on a whole bunch of other show and custom cars, and on the production Argentinian Dodge Coronado/Polara/GTX…) is a 240mm × 130mm item used as factory equipment on cars like the Renault 12 and 16 (made by Cibié and Marchal in a whole bunch of different versions—with one tungsten bulb, with one or two halogen bulbs, with one tungsten and one halogen bulb), the Saab 99 (made by Hella and Bosch with one halogen bulb), the Ford GT40 (made by Cibié and Lucas with one tungsten or one halogen bulb), and on a smattering of motorcycles (mostly Bosch).
Another such headlamp was a little taller and a fair amount narrower; that was also ooh-la-la exotic show-and-custom car stuff in America but everyday equipment on scads of very ordinary cars in Europe.
From the functional perspective, standardised headlamp formats make a whole lot of sense for a bunch of sturdy reasons. There were certainly legitimate objections to the way US regulators chose to implement the concept, but the concept was correct.
The GT40 Headlight comes straight out of the Citroën Ami 6, these headlight were used in many other cars like Maserati in fact your picture shows an Ami 6 headlight, the rectangular Renault headlights were a wee bit smaller
Mais non, m’sieur; you’ve got it a bit backwards. The Citroën Ami 6 used a headlamp a little taller and narrower than the Renault 12. Here’s a pic showing an R12 headlamp above an Ami 6 headlamp. Headlamps were made in many variants in both of these sizes: with flat lens, with concave(!) lens, with tungsten 2-filament bulb, with halogen 2-filament bulb, with dual halogen 1-filament bulbs, with tungsten 2-filament and halogen 1-filament bulbs; for left-traffic, for right-traffic, switchable for use on either side of the road, and that’s just looking at the Marchal-Cibié-Ducellier French-made ones.
Both of these lamp sizes were used on numerous kinds of vehicles, with a wide range of mount/aim bracket configurations. And there were numerous other oblong lamps in this size range, too, varying by no more than about a centimetre in width and/or height, some with straighter and some with rounder left and right edges, etc.
Cibié used the concave lense as in my R8S (the original by Renault), Cibié also had the kangourou headlight where there was a small lens inside the headlight for high beam, in rectangular form the latest of the R12 & R16 TS versions had these when the standard additional Cibié airport long beam lights disappeared.
Some 504 & 304 Peugeots had them, the 504 Ti and the 304 S Coupé.
And the Ds 21 & 23 and I believe the Mk 1 Escort RS or Mexico had Cibié kangourous.
Daniel Stern
Posted November 19, 2018 at 4:48 PM
Yep, Cibié made these lamps both with concave and with flat-to-slightly-convex ones.
“Kangourou” was the name Cibié applied to headlamps of any size and shape with a tungsten (R2, 45/40w) bulb for high/low beam plus an H1, H2, or H3 halogen bulb with its own reflector for additional high beam punch. Both reflectors were behind the one common lens, which had optical zones corresponding to the two reflectors.
And “Biode” was Cibié’s name for the similar lamps with two single-filament halogen bulbs (55w H1, H2, or H3), each with its own reflector, one for low beam and one for high beam, all behind a common lens—see pic attached here. Marchal called this kind of lamp “Amplilux”.
In addition to self-contained lens-reflector units, these wide and deep oblong reflectors were at the heart of a lot of model-specific lamps, too. Notable examples include the Jaguar XJS (with an internal lens with supplemental optics behind the outer cover lens) and the ’79-’80 Volvo 240.
Daniel Stern
Posted November 19, 2018 at 4:51 PM
…and here’s a Cibié Biode. This one’s a 7″ round unit, fits in place of an American sealed beam, but it’s for left-hand traffic. The larger rear reflector is for low beam; it appears black here because the low-beam bulb shield has a black oxide finish. The smaller front reflector is for high beam.
That’s an odd one, that’s clearly featuring 1970 models with the Duster and RoadRunner in the background yet this show car’s grille/headlamp shape is he 1968-1969 design. The hood and stripes Preview the 71 GTX
What’s that concept called? I tried looking it up but found zilch, though I did find this fitting period art also featuring rectangular headlamps while trying. Groovy!
Originally, it was called “Duster 1” as the Motor Trend cover shows. But that was before the release of the 1970 cars.
As you might notice, it was a different color when it first appeared. My guess would be it made the rounds in 1969 as the bronze-colored Duster 1, then was given the yellow respray for the 1970 season where they probably called it something else so as not to confuse it was the production A-body car. In fact, they might have just parked it out on the show floor without any kind of name on it, at all.
Between the sealed beams and the US bumper requirements, it was tragic what happened to US market 3500’s.
It is still one of my favorite Rovers (and boy would I love to import one now), but it certainly soured all but the Austin-Rover faithful in the US on them. And likely, even some of the left for something more reliable…
I think one of the very best uses of rectangular headlights was on the Fiat 130 coupe. It’s a beautiful car overall, but those big, imposing lights were the right final touch.
Can someone explain the French yellow headlights? My impression is that France required yellow headlamps for a period of time. Tradeoff between lower light output vs “less glare” in rain, for or snow?
France required a particular kind of yellow light from 1936 to 1993. I’m working on a detailed piece on it to post here on CC, and this present headlamp-related post should get me moving on it. A great deal of mythology has built up over the years, but the nutshell version is that the French declaration of yellow lights being less glaring was based on a faulty premise, but was nevertheless correct for a different reason, but that benefit was cancelled out by the filtration losses making already-inadequate lights even less adequate, but the French—being French, especially in the face of the Germans’ scorn for the French and their yellow lights—stuck with them until forced to allow white ones by Europe-wide vehicle equipment standardisation initiatives.
The Coronet would had look handsome and agressive just like the Argentinian Coronado/Polara/GTX
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3whkrTeOyH4
Time to remember another show car who showed squared/rectangular headlights: the 1967 Chevrolet Camaro Waikiki.
https://www.curbsideclassic.com/blog/beach-time-1967-camaro-hawaiian-shouldnt-they-have-shot-it-in-honolulu-instead-of-detroit/
IIRC, there were Mustang show cars in the 60s that also used rectangular headlights. A few prototypes of the original Mustang had extended fenders with the headlights behind peaked, clear covers. And I seem to remember at least 1 Mustang Mach prototype that had rectangular headlights and side windows that were fixed in place but had little drop down panels in the “glass” for toll booths.
I remember the “Sonny & Cher” customs (I think I built an AMT model kit or two)–would these have been “street legal” on a one-off car at the time?
The vehicles still exist in what looks to be very good condition. They were in the back of a Hoovies Garage episode filmed at the Midwest Dream Cars Collection museum which is supposed to open in 2019 in Manhattan, Kansas.
The collection seems really unfocused, imho, and with a 21 year old curator and a wealthy couple directing and funding it, the question is open as to its long term success…
Not all cars look good with square headlights.
Poor thing looks like it’s squinting really hard!
x2
Is it just me or does the front end look like it came from a 1981-87 Pontiac Grand Prix? I do agree not all cars look good with squared headlights
Actually, I’m suspicious that the headlights came off of a Kenworth truck. Obviously the sealed beams themselves are standard, but most cars didn’t leave gaps in the trim to get at the screws for easy replacement or to adjust the aim.
It’s a bit awkward, but given how highly customized it already is, I doubt it’s really hurting the value much.
Not hating this though
Also this
“Not all cars look good with square headlights.”
I’m sure this seemed like a good idea in ’76 when this was just a 30 year old Lincoln.
Now it looks like the guy set fire to $50,000 of resale value.
Believe me, in the 1976 antique car hobby, this was not just “a 30 year old Lincoln”. Continentals thru 1948 are considered classics by the Classic Car Club of America. Whoever did this one, if it was done back then, wouldn’t have had the balls to take it anywhere near an antique car show.
I watched the equivalent at a Hudson show once. The guy with the hot rodded step-down Hornet was told in no uncertain, definitely impolite, terms to get that piece of shit off the field.
No foolin’!
NO cars look good with square headlights.
Fixed that for ya! 😉
My Fairmont disagrees 🙂 .
I almost always like the 4 round light look. Especially on European cars that had an aero type in it’s home country, but had to adapt to ‘Merica. Mercedes SLs and Mk1 Capris come to mind. Some cars like the ’81-’87 Grand Prix look great with square quads. But I have been told I am weird. Ruggedly handsome, yes, but also weird. And humble. Super-duper humble. And I try really hard not to act pretentious…
The fact that so many European cars were also built for export to the US still constrained their designers, even if they used rectangular lights in global markets. That, plus the long design cycles, mean that only in the 90s did we start to see designs that were truly unconstrained by the form factors defined by the old sealed beams.
If the 69 Coronet wasn’t mean enough looking already! That angry face would put the tail between the legs of every modern aggressive front end in existence.
One thing I will always give the restrictive regulations though, it kept designer’s one their toes. I can concede that body shapes across brands and companies could often resemble each other for a given year, but front ends were always very easy to tell one car from another, despite most cars sharing those components. Once flush headlamps came along they were hamstrung(and motivated by) aerodynamics and inexplicably ended up more homogeneous looking in design for a given model than universal sealed beams.
The Mustang II is another American car that I feel was designed for square headlights, as mentioned Mustangs concepts throughout the 60s sported them so it would seem natural to include them on the totally reimagined 74. The square bezels around round singles they used seemed to be stopgap measure for an update that never came to fruition.
Also the one year wonder 1965 Fairlane, which had been discussed here. That rather out of place front end makes so much more sense (and probably look better) if it had pioneered square headlights, but because that never happened it looks completely out of place in the 1965 lineup
I always felt that the 65 Fairlane with it’s large rectangular bezels for small round headlights was a feeble attempt at mimicing the 65 Galaxie. (Same idea, but one is vertically oriented while the other is horizontally oriented.)
My alternative theory is that someone switches the designs for the 65 Comet and Fairlane. The Fairlane and big Mercurys both had horizontal headlights while the Comet and big Fords both had vertical headlamps.
BTW, the 74-81 Camaro had rectangular turnsignals in front next to headlight buckets that looked like they could easily have been modified for square headlights. Of course it would also have involved tweaking the shape of the forward edge of the front fenders and hood. Pontiac put rectangular headlights on the Firebird, but Chevy never bothered to spend the money on the Camaro.
That’s what I had always thought too, but this article below posted in a comment in an older topic really illuminated things for me.
https://www.curbsideclassic.com/curbside-classics-american/curbside-classic-1965-fairlane-the-most-forgotten-car-of-the-60s/
I recommend reading through the comment chain starting with Don Andreina‘s comment with this attachment, my theory is elaborated on more in my posts, but in summary Ford had made a legitimate attempt at getting European square headlamps legalized for the 1965 Ford’s, but abandoned the idea after legal hurdles squashed it. They go on to talk about how the Comet wound up with stacked headlamps(as 65 big Fords used) but with conflicting recollections I actually suspect the car that had fenders too far along to switch to stacks was the Fairlane(still slated for the would-be corporate European headlamps) and not the Comet, which could have easily carried on with the one year only 64 skin.
I made this quick chop of a 65 Fairlane with Taunus headlamps, looks very natural to me 🙂
Geeze, nice work with Photoshoop! And yeah, that’s what the ’65 Fairlane should’ve looked like.
I do like it.
I wish it was still possible to catch that kind of Dodge Fever. I would pay $4k for a loaded up one of these in a heartbeat. 🙂
Yes, but you have to use 1969 dollars and not 2018 dollars to pay for the car.
The “face” reminds of the Mk1 Escort’s scowl.
Here’s a 1964 Olds showcar with rectangular lights.
Chevrolet also used it for a showcar as well along with a nameplate who’ll be used later for Oldsmobile. http://autosofinterest.com/2012/12/06/guest-post-1966-oldsmobile-toronado-design-history-part-1/
It’s really hard to tell what American cars might have looked like simply because they were styled around the headlight shapes that were available at the time. The round quad lights were approved for 1957, quad rectangulars for 1975 and GM went whole hog on single rectangulars for its new A-bodies in 1978.
The way to tell how different things might have been is to look at how styling changed when the restrictions were lifted in the 1980’s. The 1984 Lincoln Mark VII was the first with integrated lights, and it’s clear sealed beams would not work in their place. Picture the Taurus without its trademark aero lights. Ford came out with new noses for all their cars over the ensuing years.
The SVO Mustang was clearly designed for them, but initially came out with single rectangulars. That was rectified with later models.
The Mark VII was designed to have rectangular lights as a backstop measure, like the SVO Mustang. IIRC, the aero lights were approved only about a year before production – well after the design was locked in.
Yes, I have seen the photos of Mark VII with quad rectangular headlamps and front turn signal indicators in the bumpers.
According to Car and Driver, Ford spent a million dollar each on two headlamp designs before ending up with aero headlamps.
Aero lights are just fine. But I miss the cost advantage of the standardized sealed beams. For a while, Ford (and some others) acknowledged this by using a special fascia for their fleet light trucks. Standard sealed beams were used in place of the aero ones used on the more expensive versions.
Replacements cost about $10 and were available everywhere. It looked cheap, but for a fleet vehicle, who cares?
Nowdays even the lowliest fleet vehicles have aero headlights with their associated increase in cost.
It’s the cost that bothers me, and LED and built in radar has made it much worse.
They do work great though, for the most part.
They don’t look cheap when the expensive E and F series equivalents all have yellowed and clouded aero lenses today, while the otherwise beat up work trucks/vans still on the job still have crystal clear sealed beams
I’ve got a fleet model Chevy pickup and prefer the clean gray plastic grille and glass sealed beam look. One disadvantage of the old glass sealed beams was that they would burn out instantly if cracked. Modern ones have a halogen capsule inside, so you have time to buy a replacement for $10 before the reflector tarnishes.
That’s one biggest advantage: I can convert them to ECE headlamps from Cibie or Hella rather than search for the obscure OEM ECE headlamps from the manufacturers let alone paying prince sum for the precious set.
My former Chevrolet Celebrity had a set of Hella ECE headlamp set, and they improved the night vision dramatically, especially for the rural road driving in Texas.
I don’t miss the sealed beams being utter garbage as lights.
Here’s another show car – the 1965 Plymouth VIP.
And one more – the 1968 Mercury LeGrand Marquis.
The ” family truckster wagon queen’s” grandma.
The VIP front looks like the back of a Ford Galaxie!
Maybe seeing it in real life might help (or just in color), but that absolutely looks like the rear end of the car.
We got em in 1970
These look great, I love the 67-69 Dart hardtop body but truthfully never found the front end with the inset grille very appealing, so this is the best of both worlds and distinctive in its own right.
I’m the other way around, it may be the inset version is a grass is always greener thing, but the fact is it is one of my favourite front designs ever.
Simple and even generic maybe, but unique as well.
With the ultimate expression in 71
Had a VH not the performance model though, not great lights at night, the next model VJ with round lights was better for night driving.
This one reminded me of the 67 Olds Toronado customized by George Barris for the TV show Mannix.
I read those rectangular lights came courtesy of the Hillman Hunter, which is why they look disproportionately small on the much bigger Valiant.
Not sure about that, the Hunters had a wider rectangular head light before that one
That’s another instance of the 240 × 130 mm unit used on the Renault 12 and 16, the Saab 99, the Ford GT40, etc.
The Australian rectangular-headlamp Valiants would’ve looked better, in my estimation, with the 200 × 142 mm lamps (the US single-large-rectangular sealed beam size) but it didn’t yet exist when those cars were designed. The smaller 180 × 130 mm Lucas sealed-beam lamps were already in use on a variety of Brit cars (Ford Capri, Hillman Avenger, etc), and Australia—a Commonwealth country—had ready, cheap access to Lucas componentry, so.
Is there an explainer for why that regulation was first put in place and why it took 43 years to get rid of it?
Early separate bulb headlamps were not well sealed, so reflectors tarnished and light output suffered after a few years or less. Like today, OEM replacement lenses and reflectors may have been relatively expensive dealer-only items as well. In 1939 this was considered an advance in automotive safety. The 1957 quad lights were a recognition that at super highway speeds more high beam output might be beneficial.
But it did take a ridiculously long time for the US to lift the regulation insisting on sealed-beam headlights. They were indeed the best in 1940 but were blown away by quartz-halogen technology soon after. There were halogen sealed beams in the early 1980’s, but because the reflectors were simply spray-painted silver, they weren’t quite as effective as replaceable-bulb lights.
Tell me about it. I was running Hella H4 halogen conversions for the 7″ sealed beams back in ’73 on my Vega GT. If you did serious rallying, it was considered a minimum necessity. The factory sealed beams were absolute crap on comparison.
And then I had to pull them every six months to pass PA state inspection (I seem to remember inspections were bi-annually back then).
Who told you that? Headlamp reflectors have never been “spray-painted silver” or anything even close. The reflectors in halogen sealed beams were always the same as the reflectors in regular sealed beams: perfectly specular vapor-coated aluminum with reflectivity in the high 90s. That’s the same material used for reflectors in composite headlamps, with sometimes-adequate clear lacquer or silica topcoats to stave off dulling oxidation. No clear coat is necessary with sealed-beam construction.
And no, sealed beams were not “blown away” by quartz-halogen technology soon after 1940. That is a common mythunderstanding that conflates the technological, technical, and regulatory factors that made US headlamps different from European headlamps, and baselessly scorns US lamps as poopy while just as baselessly elevating European headlamps as awesome. The facts—the actual, real, measurable, objective ones—do not align with that simplistic and misinformed thinking.
Were most US sealed beams very unpleasant to drive with at night? Yes, they were, largely because of their minimal foreground light, which creates the uncomfortable feeling of driving without enough light. But that is a feeling, a subjective impression; it is not reality. European headlamps tended to provide a lot of foreground light, which creates the feeling (another subjective impression) of great lighting, but is useless at speeds above about 25 mph, and those same European headlamps tended to provided very minimal peak intensity on low beam.
Result: the driver is less comfortable but has greater seeing distance with a properly-aimed US sealed beam (plain or halogen), and is more comfortable but has shorter seeing distance with a properly-aimed European headlamp.
Extensive study was done all over the world over many years’ time, trying to figure out which headlamp system was superior. Most studies, no matter where they were done, came to similar conclusions: some advantages to this system or that system under these or those conditions, but no big, substantial, significant safety performance advantage to either system over the other.
That’s because low beams, whether they’re US or European type, are severely and inherently inadequate to the task we ask of them. Most of the time, most of us outdrive our low beams. The world’s best low beam, no matter what regulation it’s built to, is not adequate for road speeds above about 45 mph, tops.
Properly-implemented ADB is the solution.
Daniel, your arguments are well supported and thoughtfully stated. Always enjoy reading your comments. And that you said poopy.
I am sorry, Daniel, this is where we disagree. I earned my driver’s licence in Texas in 1982, and I did a lot of rural road driving outside Dallas. That’s where the US headlamps failed me big time. Not based on just one car but many different vehicles, including the ones from Ford.
What you didn’t mention in your comment is the inclement weather condition. The US headlamps cast too much light upward, reflecting back to me, especially in Colorado with lot of snow and fog.
As I have said many times in the previous comments (and you know it, too), I converted my Chevrolet Celebrity to ECE headlamps, which made driving less stressful at night with no street lamps and pitch black night sky in Texas and Colorado. My friends in both states had been asking me to help them obtain, fit, and align the ECE headlamps if their vehicles allowed them.
After moving back to Germany in 2006, I started to drive different vehicles on the Autobahnen and Landesstraßen where they’re not always illuminated by the street lamps. Not including the roads through the mountains (alert: snow, fog, rain at night) in the southern Germany. I see the huge difference between US and ECE headlamps even some of ECE headlamps that were considered bad. The only exception is US headlamps by Valeo fitted to second generation Dodge Intrepid: the rest of US vehicles that I drove wasn’t as good for the rural road driving or inclement weather condition.
My real world driving experience doesn’t match your newly formed opinion that ECE headlamps are bad and US headlamps are better when properly aimed. Don’t tell me how great the Ford headlamps from the 1980s! I regretted one time hiring a Ford Tempo when its headlamps didn’t cast anything out in the rural road that would allow me to drive faster than 30 mph. I avoided the certain car hire agencies that were exclusively Ford products for that reason.
I am not sure what has gotten you, Daniel, lately that you seem to focus more on studies and neat numbers or graphic representations of headlamp output rather than the real world driving experience.
If ECE headlamps were bad and US better, why did NHTSA approved the H4 (excuse me, HB2 or 9003, if you insist on proper US name) for the US market in 1991 and allowed the ECE beam with sharp cut off or Z-beam output?
Just quit with disparaging comments based on pure science rather than real world driving experience. I am sorry, but I couldn’t hold it back anymore.
Oliver, if you think I’m going to throw facts and science at your opinion-based argument, well…you’re wrong about that, too. 😉 Instead I’ll just refer you here.
I prefer the good old round ones…..
This reminds me of Paul’s article from a few years ago calling the Chevelle the American Big Opel. The 2 cars really did look alike at a glance, except for the jarring difference of the wide rectangular headlights on the Opel. At first it seemed so weird and out of place, but now I feel like the round lights look strange, like they’re too small or something!
Uhm… If today’s cars are going to have such specific headlight applications, such as only fitting the car model that it is on, is it too much to ask that they be made out of real glass and not plastic that clouds from sun exposure? The bottle of Ragu spaghetti sauce that was poured on your supper came from a glass jar. The jar full of sauce costs $2. That glass jar will be thrown away, but the plastic headlight lense that costs $$$ is expected to last for the lifetime of the car which it won’t without some polishing. DUMB!
Polycarbonate lenses could be a whole lot more durable than they are, but the auto industry doesn’t want to pay for it and the regulations don’t require them to. Which is a shame, because there is a direct causal link between headlamp lens degradation and pedestrian deaths. A very adept scientist at one of the major OE suppliers of headlamps did a thorough chunk of research on the subject and presented an unbroken evidentiary chain between the one and the other: many pedestrians are dead who wouldn’t have been if headlamp lenses were still made of glass (or a material with equivalent durability).
I remember my ’87 Celebrity and ’89 Grand Prix both had glass lenses. Then I got a ’92 Mustang with plastic. At the time I thought it was a GM vs. Ford thing. Somehow it all became all plastic. Ever-larger and larger plastic lenses. Crawling up the hood and the fenders. More and more headlight area. Do they work any better now that they are enormous angry alien Transformer eyeballs? Now it is grilles. More and more grille area. Creeping up the hood and disappearing under the bumper. Surrounded by chrome. Big chrome lips encapsulating the entire grille which has encompassed the hood and fenders and then the headlights will be on the roof and then they add an entire extra front end over it all like a Nissan Juke…I am exhausted. We must stop it before all cars become absinthe-inspired Picassoed-up acid trips to hell. What say you?
We must stop it before all cars become absinthe-inspired Picassoed-up acid trips to hell. What say you?
I think we’re already there, and ironically with all that abstract freedom they all inexplicably manage look the same!
Hard-costed polycarbonate is much more chip- and crack-resistant than glass. You would be replacing your headlamp assemblies more often if they were glass. Is that what you really want? Or do you usually call things “dumb” for no reason?
Oh, and UV resistance of polycarbonate lenses has been improved over time. My Ranger is almost 8 years old, is parked outside 24/7, and the headlamps are still crystal clear w/o a hint of frosting or yellowing.
I have never once seen a late 80s GM with the glass lenses cracked or noticeably chipped unless the car was in an accident. My neighbors Infinity G37 completely disagrees about the UV resistance being any better than it was 20 years ago.
No, Hardboiled Eggs and Nuts is correct. We don’t have to guess or shake our opinions at each other about it; rigorous US data show glass headlamps stayed in overall better functional condition longer than polycarbonate ones do. Of course there are specific-case exceptions of unusually weak glass and unusually durable polycarbonate, and there are certainly areas of the country where impact damage is more of a concern than UV-induced lens degradation, but overall even the best polycarbonate headlamp lenses don’t have a functional lifespan anywhere near that of the average glass lamp. Pedestrians die in significant numbers as a direct result.
1966-’69 Dodge Dart built in Spain by Barreiros, pic 1 (also note turn signal repeater at front of fenderside spear trim):
1966-’69 Spanish Barreiros-built Dodge Dart, pic 2:
Here’s an idea dreamed up by GE’s vehicle lighting engineers in the early 1960s. The notes in the technical history binder this came from are as follows: “Neither Detroit’s stylists nor GE’s manufacturing people cared for this one”.
Those could create some cool looks but I’ve got to imagine they were much more expensive to make than 2 separate round bulbs. the retaining ring would have been a pain too,
…and here are some early square sealed beams GE devised in the mid-late ’60s. The one on the right was deemed excessively square, and the rounded-square one on the left cost too much to make.
I wondered why we never got square lights only rectangular, good to see that they at least experimented with them. I think the ones with the rounded corners would have been easy to slip in and integrate with existing body lines.
The oblong headlamps on the Dodge show car in the lead pic (and on a whole bunch of other show and custom cars, and on the production Argentinian Dodge Coronado/Polara/GTX…) is a 240mm × 130mm item used as factory equipment on cars like the Renault 12 and 16 (made by Cibié and Marchal in a whole bunch of different versions—with one tungsten bulb, with one or two halogen bulbs, with one tungsten and one halogen bulb), the Saab 99 (made by Hella and Bosch with one halogen bulb), the Ford GT40 (made by Cibié and Lucas with one tungsten or one halogen bulb), and on a smattering of motorcycles (mostly Bosch).
Another such headlamp was a little taller and a fair amount narrower; that was also ooh-la-la exotic show-and-custom car stuff in America but everyday equipment on scads of very ordinary cars in Europe.
From the functional perspective, standardised headlamp formats make a whole lot of sense for a bunch of sturdy reasons. There were certainly legitimate objections to the way US regulators chose to implement the concept, but the concept was correct.
The GT40 Headlight comes straight out of the Citroën Ami 6, these headlight were used in many other cars like Maserati in fact your picture shows an Ami 6 headlight, the rectangular Renault headlights were a wee bit smaller
Mais non, m’sieur; you’ve got it a bit backwards. The Citroën Ami 6 used a headlamp a little taller and narrower than the Renault 12. Here’s a pic showing an R12 headlamp above an Ami 6 headlamp. Headlamps were made in many variants in both of these sizes: with flat lens, with concave(!) lens, with tungsten 2-filament bulb, with halogen 2-filament bulb, with dual halogen 1-filament bulbs, with tungsten 2-filament and halogen 1-filament bulbs; for left-traffic, for right-traffic, switchable for use on either side of the road, and that’s just looking at the Marchal-Cibié-Ducellier French-made ones.
Both of these lamp sizes were used on numerous kinds of vehicles, with a wide range of mount/aim bracket configurations. And there were numerous other oblong lamps in this size range, too, varying by no more than about a centimetre in width and/or height, some with straighter and some with rounder left and right edges, etc.
Cibié used the concave lense as in my R8S (the original by Renault), Cibié also had the kangourou headlight where there was a small lens inside the headlight for high beam, in rectangular form the latest of the R12 & R16 TS versions had these when the standard additional Cibié airport long beam lights disappeared.
Some 504 & 304 Peugeots had them, the 504 Ti and the 304 S Coupé.
And the Ds 21 & 23 and I believe the Mk 1 Escort RS or Mexico had Cibié kangourous.
Yep, Cibié made these lamps both with concave and with flat-to-slightly-convex ones.
“Kangourou” was the name Cibié applied to headlamps of any size and shape with a tungsten (R2, 45/40w) bulb for high/low beam plus an H1, H2, or H3 halogen bulb with its own reflector for additional high beam punch. Both reflectors were behind the one common lens, which had optical zones corresponding to the two reflectors.
And “Biode” was Cibié’s name for the similar lamps with two single-filament halogen bulbs (55w H1, H2, or H3), each with its own reflector, one for low beam and one for high beam, all behind a common lens—see pic attached here. Marchal called this kind of lamp “Amplilux”.
In addition to self-contained lens-reflector units, these wide and deep oblong reflectors were at the heart of a lot of model-specific lamps, too. Notable examples include the Jaguar XJS (with an internal lens with supplemental optics behind the outer cover lens) and the ’79-’80 Volvo 240.
…and here’s a Cibié Biode. This one’s a 7″ round unit, fits in place of an American sealed beam, but it’s for left-hand traffic. The larger rear reflector is for low beam; it appears black here because the low-beam bulb shield has a black oxide finish. The smaller front reflector is for high beam.
Just for you, a cute sixties girl and her impeccable Ami 6
The Plymouth version:
That’s an odd one, that’s clearly featuring 1970 models with the Duster and RoadRunner in the background yet this show car’s grille/headlamp shape is he 1968-1969 design. The hood and stripes Preview the 71 GTX
What’s that concept called? I tried looking it up but found zilch, though I did find this fitting period art also featuring rectangular headlamps while trying. Groovy!
Motor Trend called that car as “Road Runner Duster” when that show car did the cover of Motor Trend. https://imgur.com/a/TlrcE7O
Originally, it was called “Duster 1” as the Motor Trend cover shows. But that was before the release of the 1970 cars.
As you might notice, it was a different color when it first appeared. My guess would be it made the rounds in 1969 as the bronze-colored Duster 1, then was given the yellow respray for the 1970 season where they probably called it something else so as not to confuse it was the production A-body car. In fact, they might have just parked it out on the show floor without any kind of name on it, at all.
The 604 in European livery I’d say cute
The 604 in US livery, the whole characteristic front of the car has been ruined by the US headlights
No worse than what happened to the Rover 3500.
One positive thing about it, it’s still true to the design that inspired it. Though pop-ups would have been preferable…
Between the sealed beams and the US bumper requirements, it was tragic what happened to US market 3500’s.
It is still one of my favorite Rovers (and boy would I love to import one now), but it certainly soured all but the Austin-Rover faithful in the US on them. And likely, even some of the left for something more reliable…
This 1970 Plymouth Barracuda with the yellow E-code (perhaps Cibie?) headlights and French license plates looks oh so fine!
Those are Marchals.
I think one of the very best uses of rectangular headlights was on the Fiat 130 coupe. It’s a beautiful car overall, but those big, imposing lights were the right final touch.
Can someone explain the French yellow headlights? My impression is that France required yellow headlamps for a period of time. Tradeoff between lower light output vs “less glare” in rain, for or snow?
France required a particular kind of yellow light from 1936 to 1993. I’m working on a detailed piece on it to post here on CC, and this present headlamp-related post should get me moving on it. A great deal of mythology has built up over the years, but the nutshell version is that the French declaration of yellow lights being less glaring was based on a faulty premise, but was nevertheless correct for a different reason, but that benefit was cancelled out by the filtration losses making already-inadequate lights even less adequate, but the French—being French, especially in the face of the Germans’ scorn for the French and their yellow lights—stuck with them until forced to allow white ones by Europe-wide vehicle equipment standardisation initiatives.
I’ve always loved the KAD Opels of the ’60s
Brazil F-1000 produced from 67-1992. This F Series bodystyle ran from 67-72 in the US with round headlights.