XM abroad? Lights for sale.

[Citroenesque]

Blimey. OK. There was no flash used BTW.

Here's with the glass off. And the number is: 0492092





Am I right that, apart from the lack of a diffuser and a different glass, RHD and LHD lights are the same. So, if I were to remove the diffuser from my RHD lights and replace the glass it'd be the same as replacing the whole unit. (So why bother I hear you ask), well given I spend about 16 times more time driving in the UK but I want a slightly better dipped beam so what if a) I removed the diffuser from the RHD lights, or b) retained the diffuser and used the LHD glass? Or would it make best sense to put LHD lights in (with the addition of some external deflector)?

As it is I have put brighter bulbs in which have made a significant difference to brightness (hardly surprising ) but not much about beam range or pattern.

[Dieselman]

Your pictures are mainly the main beam section, which won't be any different, but from what I can see there doesn't appear to be any noticible difference in the dip beam reflector other than no lens fitting.

I wonder if the inner acrylic lens has simply been replaced by the outer glass one for improved optical clarity.

[robert_e_smart]

The pictures aren't resizing from Photobucket correctly, select the direct link from the pic on properties, and paste into a new window and you get the whole pictures.

http://i26.photobucket.com/albums/c121/ ... GP0670.jpg

So am I right in saying that the modification for LHD markets was to do away with the plastic beam defelector plate, and to make the front glass lens act as a deflector instead.

Phil, for improving your lights, a HID Xenon kit is what you need. They're easy to fit and very effective, just leave the RHD lamps standard. I wouldn't use the LHD lights with a beam bender taped on to it. The lights wouldn't be as good.

[Dieselman]

The pictures aren't resizing from Photobucket correctly, select the direct link from the pic on properties, and paste into a new window and you get the whole pictures.

.

Already did that..

[xmexclusive]

As has been suggested it looks to me very much as though for the new LHD light the optics of of the plastic lens has been eliminated by using a much more complex design of glass lamp cover that incorporates that final beam correction. It also seems this beam correction is the feature that cuts off the dip beam and makes it LH or RH. I now think that the complex surface of the reflectors will be common to all.
It would be interesting to set up a new style LH headlamp rigidly in the workshop facing a white wall and mark out the cut-off lines. Then change the glass cover for a RH one and compare the beam cut-off lines.

John

[Citroenesque]

The pictures aren't resizing from Photobucket correctly, select the direct link from the pic on properties, and paste into a new window and you get the whole pictures.

.

Already did that..

I think there's enough information in the pics to see the lack of an inner diffuser/deflector, which apart from the glass is the only apparent difference.

[robert_e_smart]

Looking at John's comments further, this time with a PSA bean counters hat on. For the series 1 XM, Citroen had no extra development cost to make a light for the RHD market. Just get Valeo to reverse the beam deflector for RHD markets on assembly.

[xmexclusive]

Hi All

I think that we are looking at two seperate developments here with the LHD new glass the first costly one.
When first released in 1989 the XM dipped headlights were an advance of any available.
Six years later those same dipped headlights were considered poor performers.
Perhaps Citroen belatedly realised that service deteriation was a major factor in this.
It might explain why from 1996 model year onwards for RHD the plastic lens was changed to a non yellowing material.
The yellowing cuts out up to half the wavelength and light emitted by QH bulbs.
The actual amount varies with bulb make as not all QH bulbs have identical wavelength spread.
As the QH filament burns and ages less white and more yellow wavelength is produced.
This can cut the effective output by another half.

In the UK there will always be a cheap supply of secondhand RHD glass lenses.
The same will not apply to the later LHD glass lenses. I hate to think about the price of new.
I suspect that a set of plastic covers to protect against flying stones would be wise.

I would also like to thank those who have satisfied my interest in LHD headlamps design.
That has saved me buying a set to do my own checks.

John

[Citroenesque]

So, is anyone interested in buying these?

[robertmnorton]

Hi all it's certainly clear the outer lens's are different and the p/n posted by citroenesque confirms that.The fact that my LHD units have the Valeo stock label dated 04/11/2002 is puzzling, as of this date i doubt even citroen would have different spec replacement parts.The inner lens became a non applicable part after rp5897. But as we know, it's fitted to all UK models - as is now confirmed - as a consequence of a non RHD outer glass being developed.However at £155 apiece either LHD or RHD, just for the glass,keep all your spares!Thanks to all.
robertm