News:

Due to a technical issue, some recently uploaded pictures have been lost. We are investigating why this happened but the issue has been resolved so that future uploads should be safe.  You can also Modify your post (MORE...) and re-upload the pictures in your post.

Main Menu

Intellibeam = Guidematic Dimming

Started by Dave Smith #17592, October 20, 2005, 08:10:29 AM

Previous topic - Next topic

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Dave Smith #17592

Everything old is new again??

Hmm,  how interesting.  The new "Intellibeam" headlamp dimming system is being touted as a great new innovation.    Funny how this was developed by GM back in the early fifties already as "Guidematic Dimming system"

Cadillac dropped this option in 1988.  Low sales was the reason given.  That plus when questioned, most Cadillac owners confessed that they didnt use the system as it was not practical to leave on all the time.    The biggests drawback being it couldnt detect the taillights of the car in front of you and often kept your brights on and blinded the poor guy in front of you.


My thought is that the "Intellibeam" system will not last.   Even Lincoln dropped their "Auto-Dim" feature shortly after Cadillac dropped the "Guide-matic".

My favorite Cadillac innovation was Cornering lamps introduced on the 1962 models.  Such a great and practical feature.   A shame they are not standard on every car.

I still say if they want to bring back something from the past to boost sales and the excitement about new cars again, bring back innovative STYLING!    Better fuel economy is nice, but why must 99percent of new cars look like a half used bar of soap?

At least Cadillac is trying to be "Edgy" in the current line up.   But I feal they could be doing more.    I like the new DTS, but that rear end still looks like a 1989 Chrysler NewYorker to me!

Doug Houston

This is an interesting topic. In reality, the original name for the system in 1952 was "Autronic Eye". It was available for 6 volt systems originally, as that was the only voltage on GM cars that year. And its also true that the dimming was often too late to keep from blinding oncoming traffic. They were a nice gadget, and thats probably why people bought them. On the first 56 Cadillac I had, I found a complete system and installed it. It worked perfectly (or at least, as it was SUPPOSED to work). But, because I preferred to do the dimming myself, I kept the Autronic Eyeball turned off. The pickup head on the dash has an amber filter in front of the photomultiplier tube, so its sensitivity is peaked in that color range. When you approach a flashing amber traffic light, the headlights go nuts.

It seems that there is just so much a system like that can judge for itself. Wee see better than the PE cell in the pickup head can see, and we can judge headlight brightness better than it can. Its still a fascinating gadget, but were I ordering a new car (I never buy a new car, anyway), I would skip the headlight control.

Rich Sullivan CLC #11473

I agee with your comments, Dave. For one, I am glad to see the engineers at Cadillac bringing back an old feature, hopefully improved. I agree that distinctive STYLING is what will put Cadillac back on top, if that is possible, such as the edgy styling theme of recent years. It would be nice to see a return of subtle fiber optic lamp monitors, too! Surely, they can be designed as high-tech, and something the other makes dont offer. When I saw the rear of an 06 DTS in person, it looked better than in photos, and not so much like an 89 New Yorker, but it could benefit from even more "bladed" tail lamps, in my opinion.

Justin Crosby #22536

Hello Im a Gm master tech and I had a very rare opertunity to view the 06 DTS 3 weeks before it hit a lot. It was at a GM training center and they are bringing back the old it has a hand style clock in the center of the dash when is the last time you saw that? The night vision system is way ahead of its time as is the navigation system and Onstar is a class all by it self in safety and convenience. There is no telling what they have planed for the years to come but Im sure that it will be on the cutting edge keeping Cadillac on the top of the hill.

Justin

Rusty Shepherd CLC 6397

You mentioned that the new DTS looks like an 89 Chrysler New Yorker from the rear and it does, but it looks even more like the current Chrysler 300 from the back..the only part of the new 300 that I like.  Im glad Cadillac didnt go to the chopped look of the 300; I dont care for that and it seriously hinders visibility. Several road testers, while raving about the 300, have said that the roof is so low that the driver is forced to duck under the top of the windshield to see a signal light. The 39 GM cars were restyled with much more glass area to eliminate the claustrophic feeling of the 38s and now Chrysler has gone in the opposite direction, favoring style over function just as all car makers did in the late 50s.

David #19063

Justin,

Is NightVision still available?

Both my Parents 96 and 02 Lincoln Continentals have very nice analog clocks.

Lincoln should never have stopped making the Continental, it was the best car they had.  

The Towncar is a dressed up Gran Marquis with the same motor as the Marquis/Crown Vic.  The LS is a way overpriced entry level midsized luxury car like the CTS.

The Continental was STS sized with the similar engine to the Mustang Cobra and Mark VIII before it was dropped, the Duratec 32 valve 4.6L.

They probably dropped the Continental, so they would have sales of the LS.  The LS costs as much as the Continental, but was smaller and only has a V6 or 4.0L V8.  Otherwise, the LS would have sold poorly.

David

Mike #19861


It seems to be a typical styling trait amoung all the cars these days, the absurdly high belt lines. It makes you feel like you are sitting low in a bath tub (a revival of old styling themes?)

 The high cowls and low winshield headers restrict visibility forward and up. Those telephone post thick pillars require you to look around them. Has glass become a considerable cost in new cars?

 To me, some of the best cars for outward visibility were the 1971-76 GM hardtops. They had massive glass area, and those windshield pillars were so designed so that the width was less than the distance between your eyes so you couls see right around them. The cowls and belt lines were low so that forward visibility was unencumbered. That massive windshield allowed you to see anythginf and everything.

 In this day of safety consiousness, you would think that visibility would be high on the priority list, instead of restricting it.

 As far as Intelli-Beam, it certainly is a blast from the past. I do wonder if it works the same or better than Guide-Matic. My 86 Fleetwood Brougham is equipped with Guide-Matic and Twilight Sentinal. The headlights are completely automatic. I place a cover over the optic sensor for the headlights, and voila! Daytime running lights!

 I find the auto dimming works well in rural areas, and left on the "Far" setting. They dim as intended. But, road signs can confuse the system causing it to flash up and down from the reflection of the sign, and they dont dim when you appraoch a car from behind. Maybe Intelli-Beam is intelligent enough to figure this out.

 Mike

Morgan Murphy, No. 17409

Nightvision has been dropped for the 06 model year.

Morgan Murphy, No. 17409

I agree that the new DTS looks like an old Chrysler from the back.  When I first saw it as the Presidential limo, I thought it looked like a gussied-up K car.  In person, though, it looks better.  The trunk reminds me of the 1967 Eldorado (minus the fins).  Im only sorry they dont offer Intellibeam on the DTS.  I hear that it recognizes tailights now, and thats the primary difference between it and Guidematic.

Morgan

Denise 20352


   The windshield pillars on my Mercury piece of garbage are so thick that I cant see a pedestrian coming up from my left in a crosswalk.

-d

Lars Kneller 8246

I have 66, 68, and 77 Cadillacs with the auto dimmer and they work fair at best.  It is hard to get it adjusted as it either doesnt dim til the last second, or dims for next to nothing.  I also have an 05 STS with the "intellibeam" and it works great.  I havent used the brights manually since we got it.

Jeff Gibson #22264

Doug....I have a 56 as well and I think my Autronic Eye works...but other lights do cause it to be spastic more often than not....how do you turn the "eye" off..??

Jim Skelly, CLC #15958

The Autronic Eye (later referred to as Guide-Matic) was a novelty option that wasnt practical in everyday use.  It worked well most of the time but would be useless today.  With the proliferation of people using driving/fog lights in addition to their headlights, oncoming traffic would keep tripping the photoelectric sensor.  On many vehicles, these "driving" lights are as annoying as high-beam headlights.  People use them in well-lit areas where their use is unnecessary.  They should only be allowed in poorly lit areas and have the same restrictions as high-beams.