14 captured repliesDiscussion pagination complete · Source accounts, not a confirmed diagnosis
THIS DISCUSSION / SOURCE-DERIVED OVERVIEW
Discussion summary
YOUR RESEARCHHeadlights
Leading reported evidence
Use mcguires perspex polish
Suggestion or failed attempt
No successful repair reported for this finding.
0
Reported fixes
0
Unsuccessful attempts
1
Discussions
Read evidence and context
Explicit resolution reports before identified causes, performed actions and suggestions. Within each level, matching component labels precede direct query mentions and inherited thread context; successful versus unsuccessful discussion counts, owner confirmations and independent discussion support determine order. This is not a probability of success.
Discussions that contain suggestions
1
0 original-poster resolution reports. Counts can overlap; they are not unique people or a success rate.
0 discussions have direct query context; 0 report a fix in that context. Other evidence may inherit the discussion’s subject.
Suggestion · Original poster
will keep them good using mcguires perspex polish.
Leading evidence: 'Use mcguires perspex polish' (no explicit attributable resolution; this is a reported action or suggestion). Across 1 matching discussions, The most frequently discussed action is 'Use mcguires perspex polish' (1 discussions). For that action, 0 discussions report a resolution and 0 report an unsuccessful attempt. No action has an explicit, attributable resolution report under the current rules. These are forum reports and suggestions, not a confirmed diagnosis.
Source reports, not a diagnosis or a success probability. Counts refer to discussions and can overlap.
Explicit resolution reports before identified causes, performed actions and suggestions. Within each level, matching component labels precede direct query mentions and inherited thread context; successful versus unsuccessful discussion counts, owner confirmations and independent discussion support determine order. This is not a probability of success.
Discussions that contain suggestions
1
0 original-poster resolution reports. Counts can overlap; they are not unique people or a success rate.
0 discussions have direct query context; 0 report a fix in that context. Other evidence may inherit the discussion’s subject.
Suggestion
GT4 was the guru of such things so you can search using various words and him as an author.
Counts describe captured discussions, not unique people or a diagnosis. Author identities are not reliably stored. Exact duplicate evidence is counted once across matching discussions; one discussion counts at most once per action/state. Multiple repairs reported together remain a combination. Suggestions and failed attempts do not establish a fix. Matches cover whole discussions and can include related faults, model variants and incomplete threads.
14 eligible posts · 0 unverified posts · 1 discussions match the subject in their title or opening post.
911uk: 1 discussions
0 evidence records excluded for query context · 0 excluded by outcome qualification · 0 adjusted by outcome qualification.
0 acknowledgements have no verified action link; they do not establish a repair result.
Generation: 20261026T133652Z · outcome-qualification-6. Deterministic extraction; no AI model inference. How we use sources
Took headlights in for polishing and was told they are zenons
Are these a modification of standard lights or a mod of litronics
Or are there three different types of headlight. Bit confused
I have a 2002 996 cab.
Steve
It's a long time since we've had a xenon/litronic headlight thread.
GT4 was the guru of such things so you can search using various words and him as an author.
Alternatively the thread linked below may be enough for you. :dont know:
http://911uk.com/viewtopic.php?t=87145&start=0&postdays=0&postorder=asc&highlight=xenons+headlights
Litronics and Xenons are the same thing.
Do you have headlight washers.
Are you asking whether they're original fit or aftermarket HIDS?
On mine when I switch them on they do a little up down test.
It's easy to whip one out and see exactly what they are.
This may help.
https://youtu.be/MZLsXqFgVps
Like the idea of a lacquer not seen any places that offer that service.
I believe they had a lacquer coat as original and this is what deteriorates in the first place.
Will have to find a place that does re-coating, would have thought most spray shops could do it.
The lacquer is all-important. Without it, they just fog up again in next to no time.Good bodyshops can machine polish them and add lacquer to prevent it happening so soon after.
polished mine last summer with the maguirs kit
they came up ok at the time but with no uv lacquer added they look worse this summer than they did before i did them :roll:
Looks like you need to send them to a good bodyshop who can apply the lacquer and make the result a longer-lasting one. They have the variety of cutting pastes and polishes, the DA sander and the lacquers as well as probably experience of restoring more headlights than a private owner.
I used this guy last year great service took about 4 hours to do both lights and very pleased with the results, his based in the South East:
http://www.brite-lites.co.uk
Got lights refurbished and they look really good. will keep them good using mcguires perspex polish. They also have a headlight spray which is claimed to stop them deteriorating again. Will try it and see what happens.
I suspect that perspex polish will keep removing the top layer of plastic.
If you've had them coated (laquered?) don't use a polish or you'll gradually wear through it. If you haven't, get them laquered.
Any bodyshop will do it especially as its so easy to remove headlights on a 996. Nice quick earner for them. I paid £100 to have mine flatted and clear coated and its a superb job.
This is a source reference. Confirm exact model applicability in the original material.
