Allpar Forums banner
21 - 40 of 42 Posts
Erik Latranyi said:
Look at the close-up pictures of the new Durango lights. The projector is in the middle, surrounded by reflector.

Projectors don't need reflectors outside of them (everything needed is inside the projector)

That is simply a surface painted flat silver


The '14 Grand Cherokee SRT8 has a black surface surrounding it's projectors

 
UN4GTBL said:
Projectors don't need reflectors outside of them (everything needed is inside the projector)

That is simply a surface painted flat silver


The '14 Grand Cherokee SRT8 has a black surface surrounding it's projectors
The Charger also employs a similar surround with the projectors.
 
bumonbox said:
The Charger also employs a similar surround with the projectors.
The Charger is unique in that the base models use the regular halogen headlights, that need a large reflector to work. For the HID equipped models, they put the projector in the reflectors, with a shroud.

Charger with halogen headlights:

[This copyrighted image has been removed at the request of the copyright holder. Please do not use copyrighted images without permission.]

Charger with HIDs in Projectors:




The Dart, like the Durango is a projector only headlight, and just has a projector:




AFAIK, you only need a turn signal reflector
 
Erik Latranyi said:
The headlamp does not look like it has enough output to meet FMVSS. It does not look brighter than the fog lamps.

If they do meet FMVSS, it will be the smallest headlight on a production vehicle.
Many projectors are very small. The ones on the Cherokee look no smaller than most other projectors I've seen. There is no real point and trying to compare the brightness of the projectors to the foglights. You cannot really perceive the true brightness of projectors unless you are directly in the light path.
 
Erik Latranyi said:
I am referring to the projector lights. They seem too small (and without a reflector) would not meet FMVSS.
Is that indeed a reflector? :huh:

I'm no lighting genius, but from what I know of "projectors" - they don't need to use a traditional reflector.
 
Stratuscaster said:
Is that indeed a reflector? :huh:

I'm no lighting genius, but from what I know of "projectors" - they don't need to use a traditional reflector.
That's my impression of it too. All that is needed is inside the projector.
 
"That's my impression of it too. All that is needed is inside the projector."


That is correct, this is nothing new, Chrysler Group vehicles have this on many vehicles, like the posted pictures show.....black headlight bezels are common practice in the industry nowadays.....the light is focused(reflected) within the procjector itself. 300s has been this was for a few years as well.....
 
SRT said:
That is correct, this is nothing new, Chrysler Group vehicles have this on many vehicles, like the posted pictures show.....black headlight bezels are common practice in the industry nowadays.....the light is focused(reflected) within the procjector itself. 300s has been this was for a few years as well.....
Yes, the 300 is another example of a projector only vehicle

 
You are all right, there is no reflector on projector head lights, the surround is just a design element used to fill up open space and make it look "prettier". The projector itself is what focuses the beam of light, no reflecting going on.
 
As a side note, I just posted new "live" pics and will probably go back for more (not on Cherokee page, o show page and news.)
 
Please do get more if you can, especially of the rear from a bunch of different angles and the interior if you can. The front end I am settled on, I like it, especially in some of these new pictures.

If I were to go back and revote in our poll, I think i would be on the love it side.
 
The video shows it pretty clearly, and I think the early photos where the issue, that the dark part is a back component and is intentional
 
kdaviper said:
doesn't have to be darker headlights, they just have to darken the reflecitve part around the bulb.
That's true, but the photoshop has a darkened lens, not a darkened surround, the entire thing is dark and that's not legal, so I don't expect to see either on production models.
 
MoparNorm said:
That's true, but the photoshop has a darkened lens, not a darkened surround, the entire thing is dark and that's not legal, so I don't expect to see either on production models.
They were photochopped Norm... Poorly done at that.
 
  • Like
Reactions: UN4GTBL
If they can downplay the headlight housing as shown that does help.

For what it's worth, I actually do support having the headlights as low as is practical. It reduces the blinding effect on drivers in front and makes them work a little bit better in foggy conditions.
 
Reading the response to the front clip design is a little frustrating. At the same time you can't expect the majority of enthusiasts or the car buying public to "get" what's going on from a car designers perspective. As a former transportation design student I can tell you that car designers are thinking way the heck outside the confines of most people of which have very limited scope of aesthetics. One of the things I learned while in school was the question of why does any particular element of a cars function and/ or design have to look ordinary or be purposed in a traditional sense? How this applies to the XL's headlights is pretty simple: what you may see as the "eyes" of the car is in fact a redefined concept of where a headlight can be located. The only other car sold in the U.S. that used a similar concept is the 2003-2012 Rolls Royce Phantom (Ok, and the Juke- but the Juke is far more extreme than either vehicle in discussion). However, in that case the headlights were more elegant and not as daring as what you see with the XL Cherokee. In fact, they didn't cause as much a stir because they looked so ordinary and cleverly disguised. Also, many of you are forgetting what Chrysler PR material is saying about the thinner DRL headlamps which also include a projector beam (somehow that continually fails to be mentioned, and not just here ,but all over the automotive press). I think it would be more beneficial (and Chrysler/ Jeep PR is doing a horrible job of explaining this by providing very little explanation at all. And thus a complete lack of education) to look at this head light setup as a split headlamp design and not some super alien looking headlight design with obnoxious E60 5 series "eye brows". Lastly, the XL looks nothing like a JUke or Aztec. This comparison is beyond me. Of course we're all entitled to our own opinions, but this is my $.02.
 
jeeper_mountainman said:
Reading the response to the front clip design is a little frustrating. At the same time you can't expect the majority of enthusiasts or the car buying public to "get" what's going on from a car designers perspective. As a former transportation design student I can tell you that car designers are thinking way the heck outside the confines of most people of which have very limited scope of aesthetics. One of the things I learned while in school was the question of why does any particular element of a cars function and/ or design have to look ordinary or be purposed in a traditional sense? How this applies to the XL's headlights is pretty simple: what you may see as the "eyes" of the car is in fact a redefined concept of where a headlight can be located. The only other car sold in the U.S. that used a similar concept is the 2003-2012 Rolls Royce Phantom (Ok, and the Juke- but the Juke is far more extreme than either vehicle in discussion). However, in that case the headlights were more elegant and not as daring as what you see with the XL Cherokee. In fact, they didn't cause as much a stir because they looked so ordinary and cleverly disguised. Also, many of you are forgetting what Chrysler PR material is saying about the thinner DRL headlamps which also include a projector beam (somehow that continually fails to be mentioned, and not just here ,but all over the automotive press). I think it would be more beneficial (and Chrysler/ Jeep PR is doing a horrible job of explaining this by providing very little explanation at all. And thus a complete lack of education) to look at this head light setup as a split headlamp design and not some super alien looking headlight design with obnoxious E60 5 series "eye brows". Lastly, the XL looks nothing like a JUke or Aztec. This comparison is beyond me. Of course we're all entitled to our own opinions, but this is my $.02.
??? So anyone not liking the KL (not XL), is unschooled, ignorant, to both?
Sorry, but that's not the way to get anyone to like it...
 
jeeper_mountainman said:
Also, many of you are forgetting what Chrysler PR material is saying about the thinner DRL headlamps which also include a projector beam (somehow that continually fails to be mentioned, and not just here ,but all over the automotive press).
The new Cherokee is "KL", not "XL."

There is no projector beam in the thin DRL lights at the top of the fascia. It's LED DRLs and the turn signal. The headlight below that MAY contain a projector, depending on the trim level.
CGLLC Cherokee press release said:
Advanced LED lighting technology is used throughout the all-new 2014 Jeep Cherokee. Forward lighting features a unique daytime running lamp (DRL) shape that plays a dominant role in the fresh front-end proportion, giving the impression of a slim headlamp.
That's the same kind of marketing babble that told us the headlights on the 2001 Ram 1500 were designed to give the impression of popular quad headlamps without actually giving buyers quad headlamps.
 
21 - 40 of 42 Posts
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top