VCCA Home Forums TECHNICAL - 1945 AND EARLIER 1937-1945 Passing light - any year that had them.

It was my understanding that the passing lights were sold as a single lamp and, in intended application, were not sold as a "set." Is this correct. If so, would it be seen and judged as inappropriate for them to be installed in pairs sans fog lights. Or is there a way to just run one with fog lignts or both with fog lights. On a 41 it appears there wouldn't be room to do it. Also, what years passing lights were identical, if any?

Fog lights were listed as single or in pairs. Single was $5.85 and dual was $11.00.

The passing light was listed as a single @ $9.95. If you lived back in the Midwest you would purchase two if you had the money. They would be mandatory to prevent collisions with hogs, cattle, or other livestock. That was all free range back in the good ole days.

From 1937-1942 you could purchase one fog light or a pair.
As an example in 1941 the single light was accessory # 985716 and sold for $5.85. The pagkage of two lamps was accy # 985717 and sold for $11.00.
The passing light was sold as a single only and thats the way most could be found when new. There is nothing said that two passing lights could not be used but they are rather large and bulky for the 1941 front end.
There are several versions of the Gide passing lights available as they were sold through independent sources under the Guide name and available for various GM cars also.

Ther again it would depend on the knowledge of the judge. Talked to a member the other day that had a single fog lamp (correct) on his 1940 and had points deducted because he did not have a matching pair.
From what I can determine the 1940 and 1941 passing lights sold by Chevrolet were the same. Personally I would prefer a pair of the "normal " 1941 fog lights.

Thanks for the replies. I, too, like the fog lights over the passing lights and for the same reason, possibly, as Chevgene. The passing lights look too big and bulky given the size of the car and non-balanced with just one. Two merely compounded the impression. Whereas the fog lights were "just right" as Goldielocks (sp) may have said. Just my opinion. Thanks, Charlie

Hey guys, think someone can post a picture of the passing light? Never heard of that option before and I'd like to see one mounted up.
Thanks
Denny Graham
Sandwich, IL

Denny and other curious guys,

I will attempt to load two pics. One showing the 41 Coupe of a dashing Irishman's car, WITH a pair of stock OEM Fog lights.

The other with the Fog Lights AND OEM Passing Light {per 1941 Chevrolet Accessory Book}

I installed the Passing light about 2 months ago. I am still getting use to the way it looks. In some ways the jury is still out about keeping it on the car.

The Passing Light in the picture is installed in a different position {inside of Fog lights}. Typically the Passing Light is installed on the Out Side Edge of Bumper Bracket, {Drivers side} With Fog lights {pair} installed on the Inside Bumper Bracket.

Passing lights & Fog lights are a very popular item in So. Cal. and about 60% of the Chevy's {1938-1948} I have a pair of Fog lights and ONE Passing Light.

Hope the pics help.
Enjoy the ride,
Michael41

Look in some recent G&Ds and you will see pictures of the fog lights and the passing light. The pictures are in the series "Chevrolet Accessories for the 1941".


Some of the Chev's of the 40s catalogs show Ron Wades car with the passing lights.

Thanks guys, I'll head out on the search Ray so I can add it to my refference file.
DG

Photos posted here for Michael41.

My opinion, either remove the passing light and put the fogs back where they belong or remove the fogs....one or the other but not both.

I agree with Chevgene. And, merely in my opinion, while you are at it rub out the red paint in the bumper tips and carefully remove that sun visor also. The old saying that, "More is Less" has application here. It does nothing for the beauty of the car (maybe it does protect the dash and sometimes your eyes?). Again in my opinion, it detracts from the cars beauty and nice lines. With the above exceptions, I think that is a really nice looking car. Best, Charlie

the car is a real beauty, but the passing light looks out of place to me,

Same here.......the passing light with the fog lights is way too much. All three would probably be okay if the car was a low rider. I like the original position of the fog lights too.

The visor is too high???I've been there

Fun stuff guys-Thanks! I appreciate your comments and compliments!!

As noted, the jury is still out on the Passing light staying on the car.

Sun Visor stays. Been on the car {as a factory option} for many, many moons. And yip, I've heard the comment lots of times, "Visor is to high."

Fog light mounting position; I could not find [so far} which bumper bracket {inside/outside} they were "designated" to be mounted on. Clearance is about the same from body/grill regardless. At the VCCA Colorado event I saw them mounted on both bracket's on 95+ point cars {?}. Any one know ??

Red lines are comming off one at a time. Rear is done.

We have a lot "low Riders" in So. Cal. I've come to know, enjoy and respect them. Cars are stock & pristine. And they are fun, open, genuine and helpful, offering conversation, advise and supplies. Like many guys in VCCA, they know a LOT about and have a deep respect for old Chevy's. Very nice group. I'd say about 75% of them are currently VCCA members and support the club.

Charlie I appreciate your opinion, but the car is "nice" with or without the visor & passing light.

Enjoy the ride,
Michael41

I raised the visor on my 38 as high as I could get it because I don't like the sleepy sombrero look. Also, since I'm not vertically challenged, I'd have to lay in the seat to drive with it down.

The visor on a 1938 is a different story due to the lower windshield. A visor sticking up too high in the front acts as a big air scoop, especially when driving into a head wind.


Visor has been on the car "factory option"?....Chevrolet did not offer a visory as an accessory until 1948 and the first aftermarket visors appeared in 1946. Was common though for the owners to install visors on their pre-war cars as they were the latest and greatest thing from 1946 till about 1952.

Your fogs were in the factory correct position prior to the Passing lamp according to factory pictures.

Thanks Gene on the Fog Light {s} position, {which are needed in So. Cal. this am}.

I took pics in Colorado, seems there are a few "views" on where to mount them.

Yip again, I should have said, "dealer/after market item" on the Sun Visor. Old pic I have from the early 50's shows the car with the visor. Same one ? who knows...

Enjoy the ride,
Michael41

Thats OK mike....your still learning
You come a long way in the last few years.

I was concerned about the air scoop thing until it actually got mounted. There's a 2-3" gap full width across the back to let the air out. I've run 60 into a strong head wind without an issue although I was a bit concerned at first.

No Tiny That's not an "Air-out-opening" between your visor & the top. That's the area specifically designed to remove the skin from your knuckles as you wipe the wax off the top. If you have any trouble removing your skin give me a call...


Thanks Gene, lord knows I try....
Enjoy the ride,
Michael41

hey mike no matter what everyone comments about, your car is still one good looking vehicle

Thanks Bro, I know it is

Enjoy the ride,
Michael41

Holy Cow Mike, I guess that's why Howard Johnson made more than one flavor of ice cream

Ya know Mike, if you would lower the front of your visor, that back side might go up a little and give you a little more "knuckle" space.......

Ahhhhhh, never mind, the car looks great however YOU like it!!!
Thanks for sharing the pictures......now even we folks on the "right" coast know what a passing light is

Mike

Beautiful car!! Love the sunvisor also. First picture shows skirts and second picture no skirts?? Am I just seeing things?? Love the sunvisor and skirts things.

Thanks for sharing your photos.

Jim.