I as some have always seen American headlamp regulation as somewhat behind the curve archaic and too rigid when it comes to technology change. Audi is releasing a new headlamp technology within their LED line. It essenmtially calculates where and how much light is needed and puts it there. Now Due to a stupid 1968 regulation requiring headlights to be either on low or high beams this technology may not make it here for years to come. Granted other countries have their fair share of stupid laws too. Headlamp Rule
Audi Challenging US Headlight Rule
- Thread starter 97prizm
- Start date
- Status
Wow, it's a $3,000 option!
Originally Posted By: BobsArmory
Wow, it's a $3,000 option!
And because of the abuse headlights get, assemblies tend to be throw away options. All the fancy upgrades to beam pattern and light source technology are fine and dandy. Five years from now, the assemblies will be so sandblasted, chipped, weathered, or yellowed, that an old fashioned yet brand new conventional sealed beam will beat them easily.
Now, before the other object that one can use a protectant (chemical or a physical layer) or simply take better care of their vehicles, we know that's not going to happen. I might. You might. But the average Joe on the road with the headlights that look like they're from the 1930s obviously did not.
Wow, it's a $3,000 option!
And because of the abuse headlights get, assemblies tend to be throw away options. All the fancy upgrades to beam pattern and light source technology are fine and dandy. Five years from now, the assemblies will be so sandblasted, chipped, weathered, or yellowed, that an old fashioned yet brand new conventional sealed beam will beat them easily.
Now, before the other object that one can use a protectant (chemical or a physical layer) or simply take better care of their vehicles, we know that's not going to happen. I might. You might. But the average Joe on the road with the headlights that look like they're from the 1930s obviously did not.
Manufacturers are too cheap to use glass for their composite lenses.GM back in the late 80s/90s used glass for a few cars,sourced from Germany of all places.Guess the beancounters caught up with that move.Now its all cheap plastic,from the cheapest car to the most expensive.Plastic,the miracle petroleum..
And Audi has taken the lead in eliminating amber rear turn signals on cars imported into North America. They don't care about safety or advanced features, just the latest expensive gimmick that owners can't afford to repair or replace when damaged or broken.
Glass composite lenses, of course, aren't perfect, either. They can be susceptible to some nasty damage. That being said, my old Audi 200 had glass lenses. They held up very well and were thick as heck. However, I did have to change them, and it was no fault of the lenses. The insides were cheap.
All the reflective paint on the inside of the assembly had flaked off. I just thought it was dirty in there. Boy, was I wrong. I replaced them with some new OEMs from the States (the dealer wanted over double what Shokan in NY wanted). Would you believe they were aimed perfectly out of the box?
If I recall correctly, the first Caprices to get the composite lenses (before the football Caprice came out) had glass lenses. They did fine, but that was only for a year or two before the redesign. The 1986 we had on taxi used the normal, sealed beams.
The cost is the issue, of course. I get a cracked headlight on the old F-150, I'm only out the cost of a sealed beam. They get dim or sandblasted, same thing. One is a lot more likely to pay to replace a cheap, sealed beam than an expensive assembly. If want brand new headlight performance on my F-150, I replace them both for under $40. If I want to repeat the process on my G, look out.
All the reflective paint on the inside of the assembly had flaked off. I just thought it was dirty in there. Boy, was I wrong. I replaced them with some new OEMs from the States (the dealer wanted over double what Shokan in NY wanted). Would you believe they were aimed perfectly out of the box?
If I recall correctly, the first Caprices to get the composite lenses (before the football Caprice came out) had glass lenses. They did fine, but that was only for a year or two before the redesign. The 1986 we had on taxi used the normal, sealed beams.
The cost is the issue, of course. I get a cracked headlight on the old F-150, I'm only out the cost of a sealed beam. They get dim or sandblasted, same thing. One is a lot more likely to pay to replace a cheap, sealed beam than an expensive assembly. If want brand new headlight performance on my F-150, I replace them both for under $40. If I want to repeat the process on my G, look out.
Originally Posted By: NHGUY
Manufacturers are too cheap to use glass for their composite lenses.
I don't think it's that. Plastic has several characteristics that make it superior to glass for this application:
1) much more easily molded into the complex shapes demanded by stylists and aerodynamics;
2) much lighter, so as to help meet CAFE regulations;
3) much less prone to shattering when hit by rocks.
Yes, plastic has the primary drawback of often clouding-over eventually, but that seems to be related to the anti-scuff coating being affected by UV light. If MVSS-108 were revised to eliminate the anti-scuff requirement for plastic headlamp lenses, this problem may go away.
Manufacturers are too cheap to use glass for their composite lenses.
I don't think it's that. Plastic has several characteristics that make it superior to glass for this application:
1) much more easily molded into the complex shapes demanded by stylists and aerodynamics;
2) much lighter, so as to help meet CAFE regulations;
3) much less prone to shattering when hit by rocks.
Yes, plastic has the primary drawback of often clouding-over eventually, but that seems to be related to the anti-scuff coating being affected by UV light. If MVSS-108 were revised to eliminate the anti-scuff requirement for plastic headlamp lenses, this problem may go away.
As long as they don't blind the H%@#% out of oncoming traffic I don't see the problem.Longevity of the assembly from road abuse has become a wear item just like brakes, tires and wipers.
Originally Posted By: Tegger
If MVSS-108 were revised to eliminate the anti-scuff requirement for plastic headlamp lenses, this problem may go away.
Revise the regulation to require the return of sealed beams, and a whole bunch of problems for the consumer would go away.
Of course, if we do that, we'd be returning to the days of a driver not being able to tell the difference between an aiming screw and a bezel screw, and we'd see headlights pointed in all kinds of odd directions again.
If MVSS-108 were revised to eliminate the anti-scuff requirement for plastic headlamp lenses, this problem may go away.
Revise the regulation to require the return of sealed beams, and a whole bunch of problems for the consumer would go away.
Of course, if we do that, we'd be returning to the days of a driver not being able to tell the difference between an aiming screw and a bezel screw, and we'd see headlights pointed in all kinds of odd directions again.
Originally Posted By: eljefino
Since Audi was on the head of the curve in the 1990s bringing HIDs... purple for no reason: you can make 4000'K lights with different chemistry, I think these LEDs are a "look at me" yuppie gimmick. Good for DOT/NHTSA!
BMW was ahead of the curve, not Audi.
though Ford MoCo, did introduce an HID system that ran on AC power on the MKVIII (though.... it didn't gain wide acceptance as DC based ballasts)
Since Audi was on the head of the curve in the 1990s bringing HIDs... purple for no reason: you can make 4000'K lights with different chemistry, I think these LEDs are a "look at me" yuppie gimmick. Good for DOT/NHTSA!
BMW was ahead of the curve, not Audi.
though Ford MoCo, did introduce an HID system that ran on AC power on the MKVIII (though.... it didn't gain wide acceptance as DC based ballasts)
Originally Posted By: rfeir
I believe it was Audi's Management that decided that a purple flash was cool so they had it designed into their HID bulbs. I was a major glare problem for many people.
It's not the bulb.
It's due to the cutoff shield geometry & placement relative to the reflector & bulb.
I believe it was Audi's Management that decided that a purple flash was cool so they had it designed into their HID bulbs. I was a major glare problem for many people.
It's not the bulb.
It's due to the cutoff shield geometry & placement relative to the reflector & bulb.
The only broken composite headlight I've ever had was glass. It was fogged from pitting also.
Is it me? or does it seem that Audi driver`s are a little Cocky?
Originally Posted By: lexus114
Is it me? or does it seem that Audi driver`s are a little Cocky?
yes they are, until we get them on the road course!
Is it me? or does it seem that Audi driver`s are a little Cocky?
yes they are, until we get them on the road course!
Originally Posted By: rfeir
And Audi has taken the lead in eliminating amber rear turn signals on cars imported into North America. They don't care about safety or advanced features, just the latest expensive gimmick that owners can't afford to repair or replace when damaged or broken.
And when one of them is out and the twit is tapping his brakes it looks like a turn signal. We can live without those new Audibleep headlights. Maybe they neeed them on the Autobahn. What's the point in turning down LED lamps -- save power?
And Audi has taken the lead in eliminating amber rear turn signals on cars imported into North America. They don't care about safety or advanced features, just the latest expensive gimmick that owners can't afford to repair or replace when damaged or broken.
And when one of them is out and the twit is tapping his brakes it looks like a turn signal. We can live without those new Audibleep headlights. Maybe they neeed them on the Autobahn. What's the point in turning down LED lamps -- save power?
Holy [censored] I knew the collective was arcahic here but I had no idea. DEFENDING the DOT/NHTSA on quashing advancing technology, like they hgave been doing for years? Really?
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
- Locked
