bkn74
Member
Have an interceptor sedan 45 days out customer wants laws in headlights but doesnt think they ordered pre drilled. Has anyone done this yet and happen to have some pics for ideas??
Thanks
Thanks
2013 interceptor sedan law placement in headlights
- Thread starter bkn74
- Start date
Ford offers three options for the headlights on the Interceptor sedan.
1. Front LED package. (This includes the head light flasher emulator(combo turn signal/white) and side facing 'corner' LEDs)
2. Front prep package. (This will have 1 inch twist lock style holes in the side of the headlight housing.)
You can install just about any hideaway LED into this hole. I've even mounted high dome styles without any problems.
Code 3 has designed a LED head that will mate up with this hole perfectally. With the Code 3 LED, the headlight does not need to be removed from the vehicle for instillation.
3. Standard civilian headlight:
This is a worst case scenario. The only place I've been able to install a hide a way LED is the inner turn signal. I mount the LEDs on the 45 degree flat section.
CAUTION - this housing is dual layer design. The outer layer is plastic and the inner reflector is a compressed composite material that when drilled will create a ton of white fine dust.
The light output is really bad looking head on but at a 45 degree angle to the front of the car it is very good. When I get my car back tomorrow or Monday, I'll shoot some pictures and post them.
1. Front LED package. (This includes the head light flasher emulator(combo turn signal/white) and side facing 'corner' LEDs)
2. Front prep package. (This will have 1 inch twist lock style holes in the side of the headlight housing.)
You can install just about any hideaway LED into this hole. I've even mounted high dome styles without any problems.
Code 3 has designed a LED head that will mate up with this hole perfectally. With the Code 3 LED, the headlight does not need to be removed from the vehicle for instillation.
3. Standard civilian headlight:
This is a worst case scenario. The only place I've been able to install a hide a way LED is the inner turn signal. I mount the LEDs on the 45 degree flat section.
CAUTION - this housing is dual layer design. The outer layer is plastic and the inner reflector is a compressed composite material that when drilled will create a ton of white fine dust.
The light output is really bad looking head on but at a 45 degree angle to the front of the car it is very good. When I get my car back tomorrow or Monday, I'll shoot some pictures and post them.
bkn74
Member
Thats what im worried about is that it will be the cheapest version available. Trying to get some ideas brewing before the car gets here.
bkn74 said:
I would be frank and honest with the customer. Explain the situation and politely decline to install the HAWs. We have to wean ourselves off these things eventually. The concept of HAWs came about at a time when headlight and taillight assemblies were not the high-dollar, complex, precision components they currently are. They are generally not a good idea for current vehicles. I know you know this, and I know the old "what the customer wants" line, but best practices are still best practices.
We need to educate customers. And if they didn't order what they really needed because of their own ignorance or failure to consult, well that's gonna have to be their burden, not ours.
Sigma Safety
Member
C2Installs said:
AMEN, brother! Adding to the above, the corner strobes were a great idea when we had the simple crown vic headlights, but also because the other lights at the time were huge strobes and halogens that required a body cutout or significant grille mods to install nicely. LEDs have changed ALL of that.
We routinely advise customers to skip the corner LEDs and put in good grille and front quarter-panel (or side of pushbumper) lights instead. For the price of a Vertex and installation into one of those nightmare-ish headlight pods, you can get a very nice grille light or side-facing light that will be MUCH more effective. Other than the lightbar, really the corner lights are the most expensive lights on the vehicle (if you include parts & labour), and provide the least warning.
It is our job as professionals to advise the customer regarding their best options. If you were the customer, wouldn't you want that? It adds value to you as a supplier and helps out the customer. Everyone wins. Of course, if the customer insists on corner LEDs after you try to educate them, that's a different story.
The other option is to call Ford and see how much the "corner LED prep" headlight housings are. They might be $400/light, but it might be worth it. I wish I could help you with a part # but I don't have that one.
leftcoastmark said:
I agree with C2 and the above. A good set of grill lights and some fender lights are the ticket on the fords if they don't want to spring for the ford installed ones.
Sigma Safety
Member
Jluke said:
Or a pair of grille lights and some side lights on the fake air vent things by the driver's door hinge. You can get various versions such as the Whelen Side-kick, or use a FedSig Micropulse6 which screws directly to the 'vent' . They're a little too far back for true intersection warning, but are pretty decent.
If you're using a pushbumper on the car (which would be cheaper by far than getting new headlights) then you can use the lights of your choice on the side of the PB, as well as a couple to front. Setina has PBs with the lights built in, or you can get a GoRhino that has a new version that has a shroud to mount your own lights in it. Currently they only accept Impaxx6's , which are great lights (single, dual, or TRI colour), but versions for Whelen and SoundOff are coming in a few months.
I tend to like the GR versions better than the Setina for the Ford Sedan. With the Setina, you have to cut part of the grille. With the GR, their brackets don't require grille-cutting. Plus, GR has them in stock and Setina is 3-4 weeks out all the time.
For $300-$350 for the GR pushbumper with the light mounting shrouds (the "lit" and "unlit" GR's are about the same price) and $200 for a pair of Impaxx6's, plus $200 for another couple Impaxx6's to either side, you have a good solid warning system with almost zero damage to the car.
Sigma Safety
Member
jrfive0 said:i don't see the go rhino 's you are talking about listed on their website yet? you have a link or literature?
Not on the website yet.
Here are some quick pictures on a Ford UI with 4 x Impaxx6's to the front (center 2 are dual colour). The pushbumpers for the sedans will hold 2 x Impaxx's, the SUV ones hold 4. Sorry I don't have any of the Ford Sedans yet.CopsWest 2012 | Flickr - Photo Sharing!
CopsWest 2012 | Flickr - Photo Sharing!
CopsWest 2012 | Flickr - Photo Sharing!
FireEMSPolice
Member
If they are trying to get the "wig-wag" effect, contact member "ERM" who has created a flasher for the headlights
Ford PI Headlight Flasher Module
Ford PI Headlight Flasher Module
bkn74
Member
Kent@MoveOverOutfitters
Member
bkn74 said:
It's a daytime use only because there is only one bulb/filament per headlamp. The effect you get at night is driving with just your wig wags and no headlights. Very dangerous to drive this way because the road ahead zig zags with the headlights. Not smart to drive this way. The way around this is to install driving lights or something that will illuminate the road constantly when responding.
On a side note, when it's dark, your other lights should be doing plenty of the attention getting.
Tony
Last edited by a moderator:
fleetcomm
Member
I am not going to take a chance on having a problem or tearing up a headlight that my cost on it is $433.00 (I checked the price this morning) when the customer can spend about that amount of money and get something just as good and maybe better. I think telling the customer no on flashing the headlights will be the better way to go.
Last edited by a moderator:
Please correct your signature. You don't practice what you speak.fleetcomm said:
Btw, they don't charge $70 per hideaway when they install it for you. Something else for you and the customer to consider. Just as good or better, I think not. Watch the video and tell me what you think is more effective. After 3 years, zero problems. Hmmm. :undecided:
Tony
fleetcomm
Member
Please correct your signature. You don't practice what you speak.
Btw, they don't charge $70 per hideaway when they install it for you. Something else for you and the customer to consider. Just as good or better, I think not. Watch the video and tell me what you think is more effective. After 3 years, zero problems. Hmmm. :undecided:
Tony
Btw, they don't charge $70 per hideaway when they install it for you. Something else for you and the customer to consider. Just as good or better, I think not. Watch the video and tell me what you think is more effective. After 3 years, zero problems. Hmmm. :undecided:
Tony
Last edited by a moderator:
Sigma Safety
Member
bkn74 said:
You might get lucky on this. I heard a rumour today that Ford is starting to make the headlights in their interceptors without the "shutter" system. That's all I know at the moment, but I'll know more in a few days.
FireEMSPolice
Member
fleetcomm said:
I appreciate your concern, but please tell me one company that has a sign off of their products by a vehicle manufacturer? All the products we install, whether they be flashers to lightbars, are aftermarket products. Every manufacturer says don't install something because they do not want to be responsible for it causing another component to fail. This limits their liability and reduces their out of pockets costs.
Do you think SoundOff got a sign off for their isolation flasher for the Dodge Charger? Nope. They just put the appropriate protection to prevent damage from occurring to the vehicle's computer. It's the aftermarket manufacturer that bares the burden of the component failure if there is a screw up in the design.
I respect your opinion and value your concerns. They are valid, especially when you are trying to protect your own assets. As an installer, you have the right to refuse the installation of any item you are not comfortable with, and nobody should fault you for that. It's our job to educate our customers, and in the end, they'll respect you more for it. Just don't make recommendations based on opinion and not facts.
Tony
leftcoastmark said:
You don't suppose they've been getting tons of shit from installers and cops when asked "so... you can't put wig-wags on a police vehicle?"
:duh: :duh: :duh: :duh:
FireEMSPolice
Member
SirenWorld.com said:
You would think that the Ford Police Advisory Board would have done a better job and went over everything one would need on a police vehicle with a fine tooth comb.
FireEMSPolice said:
You would THINK. It makes me wonder who was really on the FPAB. I mean... wig-wags are a simple indication that they really didn't put a lot thought into making the Police Interceptor something special for the special duties it would be purchased for.
Another thing... how tough would it really be for them to put wire runs in the vehicles.... not relays, not 12v sources... just WIRE.... put 3-4 out in the grill area, 3-4 to the trunk and the one to the roof. Oh... and a nice 12V and Ground post somewhere centrally located. Oh... and maybe just maybe make it where you can take the headlights and tail lights out without disassembling the entire front or rear end of the vehicle! ARhhhhh I'm bitchin. Sorry. :bonk:
Here are a few pictures of where I installed SOS Undercover LAW's.
This particular car has the Ford MoCo 'pre-drilled' headlights. In reality, the housings are not drilled, but molded plastic that allows the Whelen twist lock style LAW to be installed.
In the front:
Each front light housing holds standard SOS LAW's in the factory holes. I drilled access and mounting holes in the turn signal portion of the light assembly. When looking at the light assembly, there is a 45 deg angled surface that is prime for mounting a HAW. I sort of kick my self in the butt for not installing strobe tubes as I believe the punch would have been outstanding.
In the rear:
I mounted LAW's in the taillight from the bottom in the same manner that Ford would mount their OEM LAW.
I mounted dual color LAW's in blue/amber in the lower reverse housing from the bottom up. At night, the effect of amber flashing against blue is very nice and stands out well. It is washed out during the day but it can be made out at a 45 degree angle from about 100 feet away. The focal point of the reverse light housing is optimal at a 45 degree angle to the rear of the car. If I had to do it again, I would mount LAW's either in the OEM reverse bulb hole or in the empty upper section. Ive actually been contemplating mounting a second set of amber/blue in the upper empty housing to create a large foot print of light.
This particular car has the Ford MoCo 'pre-drilled' headlights. In reality, the housings are not drilled, but molded plastic that allows the Whelen twist lock style LAW to be installed.
In the front:
Each front light housing holds standard SOS LAW's in the factory holes. I drilled access and mounting holes in the turn signal portion of the light assembly. When looking at the light assembly, there is a 45 deg angled surface that is prime for mounting a HAW. I sort of kick my self in the butt for not installing strobe tubes as I believe the punch would have been outstanding.
In the rear:
I mounted LAW's in the taillight from the bottom in the same manner that Ford would mount their OEM LAW.
I mounted dual color LAW's in blue/amber in the lower reverse housing from the bottom up. At night, the effect of amber flashing against blue is very nice and stands out well. It is washed out during the day but it can be made out at a 45 degree angle from about 100 feet away. The focal point of the reverse light housing is optimal at a 45 degree angle to the rear of the car. If I had to do it again, I would mount LAW's either in the OEM reverse bulb hole or in the empty upper section. Ive actually been contemplating mounting a second set of amber/blue in the upper empty housing to create a large foot print of light.
SirenWorld.com said:
I've spoken to a few of the guys on that board.... both were fleet managers at large agencies but neither had ANY public safety experience (LEO, FF or EMS) or upfit experience. The one thing I asked both of them about were the front door straps that were installed on both the Sedan and the SUV. Both justified it based upon preventing fender damage when an officer swings the door open in a hurry.... I explained that the car was great for a 5' 10" officer, but a taller and 'huskier' cop may find the opening difficult to negotiate when wearing a ballistic vest and duty gear. 1The guys I work with tell me I look like a transformer getting in and out of the Sedan. Although I'm good at it, the Charger's front door swing is WAY better and MUCH easier for me, a 6'1" 190 lb. guy to get in and out of...I'm taking the straps off this week.
Just remember, those boards are made up of people that know other people. They missed the mark by not consulting with more upfitters and street cops.
FireEMSPolice
Member
SirenWorld.com said:
Wonder no more
https://www.fleet.ford.com/Contacts/police_advisory_panel/Police_Advisory_Panel.asp
FireEMSPolice said:
Most of their bios lack any real world hands on experience with patrol duties....
bkn74
Member
Keith K. said:
No offense but most leos have no clue about lights, radios, installs, etc. They just know how to use them.
bkn74 said:
None taken....I guess I should have been a bit more clear... the small back window, lack of prisoner leg room, small door opening that makes it difficult to put a 230 lb. combative suspect in the back. Laying over the center console for cover in the event someone is shooting at an officer seated in the car. Exiting the driver position in a hurry when the doors don't open as far as the civilian model. Theses are ergonomic concerns that almost every single officer I know has with the Ford PI Sedan. The concern is high enough in my area that the sedan's sales are sluggish compared to the Utility. It's about a 15-1 ratio. I've heard rumors that the Nevada HP is not planning on buying anymore sedan's than the handful they purchased for road testing.
FireEMSPolice
Member
Yep! Just another admin telling the guys who will use the equipment how its gonna be. Pisses me off.
I have met and spoken with several members of Ford's PAB. They are far from incompetent oafs who conspired to produce an inadequate sedan. And the membership changes, so the current members are not necessarily the ones who consulted on the development of the new PI vehicles. Sure, not all were cops, but all have something to offer from Ford's perspective...they control/recommend vehicle selection and purchasing. And they carry influence in their profession.
Their membership is uncompensated (except for some travel, IIRC), and they hold no power to make decisions. They simply advise and hope to influence decisions by the car maker. As you can imagine, these decisions are cost vs. profit driven; in the end, the "perfect" police vehicle is simply not going to happen. Also, you must consider that the PI vehicles are retail model-based and there can only be so much difference between the two, particularly when it comes to exterior appearance and substructures. So, while the sedan's rear window is an obvious issue for police use - where the majority of non-pursuit collisions happen during backing - the PAB is not going to be able to force a complete redesign of the rear roofline/trunk area.
Additionally, the PAB doen't just advise on nuts and bolts stuff, but also on broader issues of fleet management regarding the Ford vehicles, especially life-cycle costs and commonality. The door straps, while aggravating, are simply a result of trying to lengthen the life-cycle of the door hinges and mounting mechanism. If you take a retail Taurus and throw the door open hard, watch the flex on the door shell and uni-body substructure...now repeat this the several hundred thousand times a police door is opened in just five years of service and it's easy to see how the straps came about.
Every PAB recommendation, no matter how good, bad, or obvious, has to survive review by bean counters, engineers, managers, union reps, and lawyers before it even has a chance to be implemented. And few or none of those folks have any clue about police vehicle needs.
So yeah...no wig/wags is dumb, but that was probably driven initially by the existing LCM and shutter-design of the retail lamp assemblies, and deemed too expensive or not critical enough to change by FoMoCo. If wig/wags are essential, then agencies should spec the car with that capability and the resulting loss of sales might change Ford's mind. Perhaps they intended to see if the new platforms were viable in the market before making an expensive change to the headlight systems.
I could go on. My major objection to the car is simply it's Impala-like interior room. The car is just too tight inside. The Utility is much better for the driver, but costs more to buy, more to upfit (second partition, near obligatory push-bumper, supplemental rear lighting) and looks a bit clunky. Even so, that's the direction many agencies are headed locally, including mine.
If I was going to make suggestion to Ford, I would say to add flashers for headlights/redesign headlamps, eliminate HAWs and instead make cosmetic covers/pop-out panels in the F&R bumper covers for recess-mount LEDs, add easy access fire-wall pass-through tube, make it so the PIU's B-pillar lower trim easily separates from the seatbelt's lower anchor, add 3x16g paired circuits to the grille and trunk/hatch area, and add about a shit-ton of interior room to the sedan. Oh, and add a useful console mounting plate, one with channels for bolts like Jotto Desk has. And put the horn ring circuit in a bit easier to access spot.
I'd also like to see Ford (actually, all car makers) design a mounting system for partitons that was included in the car's build...something like a hardpoint tab already exposed through the trim, with nutserts/weldnuts for easy mounting without the upfitter having to do it...kinda like Setina's system, but factory. They could better control what upfitters did and how the partition integrated with the safety systems if they did this. Ditto for the rear cargo partition on the utility. Man, wouldn't that be great...
Their membership is uncompensated (except for some travel, IIRC), and they hold no power to make decisions. They simply advise and hope to influence decisions by the car maker. As you can imagine, these decisions are cost vs. profit driven; in the end, the "perfect" police vehicle is simply not going to happen. Also, you must consider that the PI vehicles are retail model-based and there can only be so much difference between the two, particularly when it comes to exterior appearance and substructures. So, while the sedan's rear window is an obvious issue for police use - where the majority of non-pursuit collisions happen during backing - the PAB is not going to be able to force a complete redesign of the rear roofline/trunk area.
Additionally, the PAB doen't just advise on nuts and bolts stuff, but also on broader issues of fleet management regarding the Ford vehicles, especially life-cycle costs and commonality. The door straps, while aggravating, are simply a result of trying to lengthen the life-cycle of the door hinges and mounting mechanism. If you take a retail Taurus and throw the door open hard, watch the flex on the door shell and uni-body substructure...now repeat this the several hundred thousand times a police door is opened in just five years of service and it's easy to see how the straps came about.
Every PAB recommendation, no matter how good, bad, or obvious, has to survive review by bean counters, engineers, managers, union reps, and lawyers before it even has a chance to be implemented. And few or none of those folks have any clue about police vehicle needs.
So yeah...no wig/wags is dumb, but that was probably driven initially by the existing LCM and shutter-design of the retail lamp assemblies, and deemed too expensive or not critical enough to change by FoMoCo. If wig/wags are essential, then agencies should spec the car with that capability and the resulting loss of sales might change Ford's mind. Perhaps they intended to see if the new platforms were viable in the market before making an expensive change to the headlight systems.
I could go on. My major objection to the car is simply it's Impala-like interior room. The car is just too tight inside. The Utility is much better for the driver, but costs more to buy, more to upfit (second partition, near obligatory push-bumper, supplemental rear lighting) and looks a bit clunky. Even so, that's the direction many agencies are headed locally, including mine.
If I was going to make suggestion to Ford, I would say to add flashers for headlights/redesign headlamps, eliminate HAWs and instead make cosmetic covers/pop-out panels in the F&R bumper covers for recess-mount LEDs, add easy access fire-wall pass-through tube, make it so the PIU's B-pillar lower trim easily separates from the seatbelt's lower anchor, add 3x16g paired circuits to the grille and trunk/hatch area, and add about a shit-ton of interior room to the sedan. Oh, and add a useful console mounting plate, one with channels for bolts like Jotto Desk has. And put the horn ring circuit in a bit easier to access spot.
I'd also like to see Ford (actually, all car makers) design a mounting system for partitons that was included in the car's build...something like a hardpoint tab already exposed through the trim, with nutserts/weldnuts for easy mounting without the upfitter having to do it...kinda like Setina's system, but factory. They could better control what upfitters did and how the partition integrated with the safety systems if they did this. Ditto for the rear cargo partition on the utility. Man, wouldn't that be great...
I want to add this...
I blame the car makers less and less for the problems we are having installing equipment. I blame the equipment manufacturers for not adapting to a new reality by making smaller, easier to install systems that need far less footprint. I blame lighting manufacturers for making huge, complex switching systems and adding a ton of non-automated features to their lightbars. I blame console and partition makers for over-engineering a metal box or panel so that it is super heavy, bulky, and intrusive on the human occupants. I blame camera makers for thinking their systems are so important that they need to take up a ton of space. And computers that are too big and complex (iPads for everyone!).
And I blame beancounters for buying cheap instead of smart, upfitters for making things fit that don't, police officers for wanting a ton of gadgets and lights they probably don't need, and so on. We've created a monster and that monster was based on expectations that big old cars would always be available. On assumptions that these big old cars would be easy to upfit and integrate with. It's past time that we start adapting and rethinking things. And spending money for better solutions.
1. I need a video system the size of an smart phone.
2. I need a computer the size of an tablet with a Bluetooth keyboard.
3. I need a radar the size of two shotglasses and a GPS display with simple mounts.
4. I need a lighting control system that is four switches max.
5. I need a siren that is 100% horn-ring controlled.
6. I need a PA...wait, do I really need a PA? If so, common mic with radio.
7. I need a radio(s) that are smart-phone sized, and or a common remote head for multiple radios.
8. I need compact weapons systems and mounts.
9. I need rid of consoles...too bulky/heavy/not crash friendly.
10. I need a simple, soft restraint partition for prisoner.
And almost all this stuff is out there already...
1. Body-worn cameras are becoming the next big thing...simply adapt a dock system for them and mount in car. Or integrate cameras with the display screen for the vehicle com/radio center.
2. iPad or similar tablet.
3. Kustom's Raptor or Stalker's Patrol already come close. Smaller should be doable.
4/5/6. CanTrol/WeCan systems can do much/all of this.
7. Already available.
8. 14" barrels on shotguns, 11" barrels of rifles for most needs. BlacRac mounting system.
9. Eliminate them by using above equipment.
10. A simple Kevlar-reinforced nylon cargo net that affixes to the B-Pillars at six points would accomplish this. Some applications certainly still need a "real" cage, but most police transports could be accomplished with a net-like partition wall. We don't need ape-proof, just a way to contain the bad guy until we can react if they try something stupid. If they're cuffed and seat-belted, the net should be sufficient for most situations.
I blame the car makers less and less for the problems we are having installing equipment. I blame the equipment manufacturers for not adapting to a new reality by making smaller, easier to install systems that need far less footprint. I blame lighting manufacturers for making huge, complex switching systems and adding a ton of non-automated features to their lightbars. I blame console and partition makers for over-engineering a metal box or panel so that it is super heavy, bulky, and intrusive on the human occupants. I blame camera makers for thinking their systems are so important that they need to take up a ton of space. And computers that are too big and complex (iPads for everyone!).
And I blame beancounters for buying cheap instead of smart, upfitters for making things fit that don't, police officers for wanting a ton of gadgets and lights they probably don't need, and so on. We've created a monster and that monster was based on expectations that big old cars would always be available. On assumptions that these big old cars would be easy to upfit and integrate with. It's past time that we start adapting and rethinking things. And spending money for better solutions.
1. I need a video system the size of an smart phone.
2. I need a computer the size of an tablet with a Bluetooth keyboard.
3. I need a radar the size of two shotglasses and a GPS display with simple mounts.
4. I need a lighting control system that is four switches max.
5. I need a siren that is 100% horn-ring controlled.
6. I need a PA...wait, do I really need a PA? If so, common mic with radio.
7. I need a radio(s) that are smart-phone sized, and or a common remote head for multiple radios.
8. I need compact weapons systems and mounts.
9. I need rid of consoles...too bulky/heavy/not crash friendly.
10. I need a simple, soft restraint partition for prisoner.
And almost all this stuff is out there already...
1. Body-worn cameras are becoming the next big thing...simply adapt a dock system for them and mount in car. Or integrate cameras with the display screen for the vehicle com/radio center.
2. iPad or similar tablet.
3. Kustom's Raptor or Stalker's Patrol already come close. Smaller should be doable.
4/5/6. CanTrol/WeCan systems can do much/all of this.
7. Already available.
8. 14" barrels on shotguns, 11" barrels of rifles for most needs. BlacRac mounting system.
9. Eliminate them by using above equipment.
10. A simple Kevlar-reinforced nylon cargo net that affixes to the B-Pillars at six points would accomplish this. Some applications certainly still need a "real" cage, but most police transports could be accomplished with a net-like partition wall. We don't need ape-proof, just a way to contain the bad guy until we can react if they try something stupid. If they're cuffed and seat-belted, the net should be sufficient for most situations.
Hoff
Member
C2 I think you're right on a lot of your points. Equipment companies need to take a hard look at their existing product and how much space/power it's taking up in the vehicles commonly used. Going even more vehicle specific might help with some of those issues as was discussed in another thread about interior lightbars. Universal just won't cut it anymore. I think your tabs idea for cages is great. I wanted to play devil's advocate with you for a second. First about the SBR/SBS you suggested. I agree that most encounters by the beat cop won't need 700 yard accuracy, but remember that with that shorted barrel accuracy does decrease. Will that matter in a small house or appartment? More than likely not, as we'd be talking fractions of an inch difference in MOA. My point is more training may be necessary to make sure that the guys can hit what they are shooting at. I do still think that the SBS/SBR would be a good spacesaver in the vehicle. With the net "cage" that should contain a prisoner, but what about their fluids? This could be solved by making it a tighly woven net (sorry I'm imagining a net with holes in the weave). Also cleaning of said net; the manufacturer would have to make it chemical resistant for cleaning purposes. Nothing impossible, but something to keep in mind if spec'ing the net for use. I liked your idea about pop out panels in the bumper for lights. Have the motor company say "hey our holes will be 3"x 5"" and let the lighting companies figure out how best to fill that hole (so to speak). As you already know, it's all a money game. Take these ideas to a medium to large size department that is open to new ideas and they coule make it happen. Smaller departments might not be able to R & D these things or get the smallest/best equipement to save space for the officer (like mine, because they don't buy jack!). Great ideas overall and send them in with a agreement you get some creation credit ($$$) to the major companies making this stuff!
bkn74
Member
emtanderson51
Member
bkn74 said:
Be VERY careful when you drill them........there is absolutely NO way to get the shavings out of the headlight......
bkn74
Member
madpd97
Member
bkn74 said:
How did your install go anyway? I'm planning on getting some Whelen Vertexes installed on my 2013 Taurus POV. I'm kinda nervous about it, but I'm sure I'll be happy with the end result.
bkn74
Member
madpd97 said:
heres the finished car http://elightbars.org/forums/f34/2013-ford-pi-sedan-my-first-46624/
can it be done? yes. would I recommend it? HELL NO!!!! the material the headlights are made of is a composite material that creates a fine dust that will get on the inside of the lens. this dust can not be blown off/out etc. If you do do it you will need a strong vacuum and drill very very slowly and you will still get some dust inside the light on the lens. thats just my .02