7 captured repliesDiscussion pagination complete · Source accounts, not a confirmed diagnosis
THIS DISCUSSION / SOURCE-DERIVED OVERVIEW
Discussion summary
YOUR RESEARCHClear Light Upgrade - Front Only?
Leading reported evidence
Replace rear and they dony really look very different
Performed · outcome unconfirmed
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 performed work without a confirmed outcome
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.
Performed · outcome unconfirmed
I have just changed the rear and they dony really look very different to be honest.
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
No I haven't damaged the front (I would be very upset if I had, having only had the car a month!), but just figured why change the back and spend another £300 or so when I think the back looks just fine.
Leading evidence: 'Replace rear and they dony really look very different' (no explicit attributable resolution; this is a reported action or suggestion). Across 1 matching discussions, The most frequently discussed action is 'Replace back and spend another £300 or so' (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 · Original poster
No I haven't damaged the front (I would be very upset if I had, having only had the car a month!), but just figured why change the back and spend another £300 or so when I think the back looks just fine.
These are separate views of the same evidence. Frequency alone does not establish a fix, and these counts must not be added together.
Replace back and spend another £300 or so
No successful repair reported for this finding.
0
Reported fixes
0
Unsuccessful attempts
1
Discussions
Read evidence and context
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
No I haven't damaged the front (I would be very upset if I had, having only had the car a month!), but just figured why change the back and spend another £300 or so when I think the back looks just fine.
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.
7 eligible posts · 0 unverified posts · 1 discussions match the subject in their title or opening post.
Porsche Club GB: 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: 20261027T082735Z · outcome-qualification-6. Deterministic extraction; no AI model inference. How we use sources
Hi there
Looking at upgrading from my amber lights. Given my only real problem is with the front lights and I don't think the rear orange lights actually look that bad (particularly on a black car), was wondering if anyone had upgraded only the front lights to clear (including side lights) and left the rear as is. Hard to picture if this is going to look stupid or if it will actually look fine (as I am imagining!).
If the orange ones at the back look fine to you against the black, why not the front ones? [
] [
] Personally, I don't really mind the orange and don't understand what all the fuss is about - but then again I'm an old fuddy-duddy who liked the look of my old Subaru WRX with the frog-eye headlights!
I doubt it wold look stupid - certainly not to the non-anorak.
Yeah - I can understand that. Thought I might do the same, if I bought an earlier model - in the end I got a 2000, so didn't have that issue. I think it will look OK. Why, Richard ? 1) To make it look like a newer model than an 97/98 (mind you in Ireland you'll have a number plate with the year on it !) and 2) So people don't think you're driving a Boxster when approaching from the front (obviously from the rear a 911 its very different).
I'd make sure you take some photos before / during and after the swap over - so, come resale, you can prove you did this for genuine reasons and not becuase you've dinged the front (you haven't, have you ??).
Thanks Richard/Diesel130
No I haven't damaged the front (I would be very upset if I had, having only had the car a month!), but just figured why change the back and spend another £300 or so when I think the back looks just fine. Will probably keep the front amber lights even if I do upgrade, as I like to have everything thats original if for some reason I ever wanted to change it back, and they don't seem to sell for very much anyway so I figure why not keep them.
Richard I don't dislike the front amber lights, especially on the dark car. But I just prefer the clear ones look better and every time a see a 996 with the clear ones I get jealous!
Guys - I'm just waiting for orange lights to come back in fashion!! [
][
] (might be a long wait though). Orange lights on a 996 must be rarer than clear ones now!!
Don't you think the drivers of 996's with clear lenses coming the other way are thinking "Wow! There's a 996 with orange lights!" [
][
] Maybe not.
Just the front?
You wouldn't chemically whiten just your top row of teeth would you? Or upgrade only one side of the car to 18" wheels?
Please ignore me. I have added no value to this conversation at all. Meh. [&:]
Hi Greg,
I recently upgraded my front lights to clear and with the Xenon kit and left the rear orange and it looked fine, bearing in mind my car is a champagne silver type the rear looked OK.
I was recently looking to change and the chap at 911 Virgin made a comment on upgrading the rear (not to match the front) just to update it and increase the resale value.
I have just changed the rear and they dony really look very different to be honest.
Also, you may as well keep the original ones as they probably have very little re-sale value and may be of some use in the future. Maybe?
Cheers,
Rob
This is a source reference. Confirm exact model applicability in the original material.