Insider information and good sources tell me that this will be over shortly. I'm not going to say anything more than that. But it would be nice if we could reserve any more harsh criticism and judgments until that time comes. I have been somewhat critical of SG's CEO in the way that he is handling this and I stand by that. But let's give them the benefit of the doubt and let the situation shake out now...

I still don't think enough evidence has been presented by either "side" here and therefore, at least for me, I'm not going to point fingers as all the facts just are not in.

Let's just sit back and take a deep collective breath and watch...

My 2704 inflation adjusted Greek Drachmas...

 

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Sunchild
[B][QUOTE]Originally posted by babylou
[b]First you say that the elasticity of the Stongard won't impede the flex in the lamp plastic, but then you say that stretched Stongard will compress the lamp plastic.

 

[QUOTE]Originally posted by babylou

Quote:

It's as simple as this; Materials do not crack when in compression. They only crack when in tension. Methods are used in industry to actually preload pieces in compression to eliminate cracks. Shot peening accomplishes this to a small extent.

Cool. Now wouldn't the removal of the compression after an extended period be a potential culprit of the crazing? Am I still missing the point?

 

Yikes.... what a PR mess. l really hope this whole thing get sorted out soon.

When I saw this post I remebered some people on the Audi TT forum having what they called "crystalization of the Xenon headlamp lenses" It seems to affect quite a few of the TT's sometimes its one lense sometimes it's both.

If anyone is interested you can search the audiworld.com forums and find a ton of posts about it. Search for headlights and crystal. Audi has been replacing these under warranty, sometimes the replacement cracks too.

Here are a couple posts....

http://forums.audiworld.com/tt/msgs/67377.phtml

http://forums.audiworld.com/tt/msgs/78420.phtml

http://forums.audiworld.com/tt/msgs/67377.phtml

My TT hasn't had the problem and neither has my s2000. Hope this info helps....

 

I stil have not heard EXACTLY what was used to prep the lights. Do you know for fact that it contained a prohibited substance ----amonia????

 

Bieg,

I'm one sponsor who welcomes and encourages criticism. It helps us improve our products .

The Stongard position on this one baffles me.

 

Question!

Is the StonGard material for the left and right headlights cut from the same roll of film? Some cookie cutter coming down side by side to get a left and a right piece? Or left side cut then right side cut right after each other?

If so, why wouldn't one consider that there was a defect in that one particular 6"-12" piece? No quality control/assurance program can guarantee 0% defects!

Sure beats the idea that Honda's or their vendor's manufacturing processes would produce covers from different molds using probably different batches of plastic/resin would make two defective lenses, and those lenses end up on the same car.

 

This is the approach I am taking... StonGuard has just lost a lot of business. The CEO of a company like this cannot be this stupid. He must have at least some education in advertising and marketing to be where he's at. I'm not really looking for StonGuard or anything of the sort right now, but this is my opinion.

 

Man, I've been watching this post for some time and I think one comment is in order:

This stuff might be good for overlaying glass or paint but it's completely useless for its intended purpose over plastic. Those that saved your money, this problem did you a favor!

 

I owned a 1999 Acura Type R with the same density lenses as the S2000. They crazed identically to the picture that was posted in the original thread. Primarily, the cause was due to using harsh chemicals such as windex (contains amonia) and changing the wattage of bulb. The windex was the main culpret. All polycarbonates will crack or craze when caustic chemicals are applied over a period of time. Certain chemical properties are added to keep them semi flexible for expansion and contraction. With the amount of heat that is applied to the lenses from the use of the HIDs and the additional use of harsh chemicals it will change the chemical makeup of the lense. Same problems exsist with Jet aircraft canopies. Such use of chemicals are expressly forbidden. I'm not a chemist but after 27 years experience with polycarbonate and lexan canopies I think this is probally just as good a reason for it happening. My question to the Dr. would be, do you regularly use such chemicals to clean the lenses of your S2000? The two bands probally resulted at the hotest point of the lenses. Just as mine did. Didn't say that I was perfect. Even people that deal with them forget.

I agree with Tim from Stongard. Alot of slanderous responses and statements have been thrown around by many professionals ie,lawyers, doctors, accountants etc. Considering this I would have thought quite a bit more discreation would have been used. I apologize, but I don't place the value of an automobile/product over the value of an individual. There have been alot of anger filled, hateful things spoken without alot of factual support. Especially since the problem was remedied by Honda.

Stongard wasn't at fault. That's plain to see! Seems like the whole thing got blown out of proportion. I think some of us owe an apology to a reputable company. In retrospect, damage has been done that was unnecessary! If some of you placed yourself in Stongard's shoes I think that your response would have been much harsher. Especially, after reading the many negative unvalidated responses.

I for one will continue to use the product, as it is a viable one. Also, considering that there are few products available for our S2000's.



[Edited by Jeff on 05-22-2001 at 10:19 AM]