Using HIDs for high beams

[Hokiefyd]

Originally Posted By: Scott_Tucker
However, my real question is would it achieve my goals of increased visibility, or are there better alternatives?


I think your best path forward is the HIR solution that some have already suggested. In fact, once you put HIR lights in your main beams, you'll want them in your dip beams as well. We all know that the optics on dip beams are pretty well-controlled, and well-focused, but the optics on some main beams are pretty focused as well. I don't know if your Civic is like that. I would not personally choose to be the guinea pig on installing an HID kit into the main beam unless someone else has demonstrated that it works well and achieves the goal.

You KNOW the HIR solution will. You know this because it's a halogen bulb that places the light source in the same location in the housing, spatially. An HID kit may or may not work as well, and you won't know unless you get feedback from a '12 Civic owner has done or it until you put up the cash yourself to try it.

Me? My cash would be on the HIR bulbs. I have used them before and they are FANTASTIC.

 

[Ursae_Majoris]

I have Phillips 9011 HIR1-like in my low beams, and they are great!

Still maintain the same sharp cut off as the factory bulbs.

For HIRs make sure that your car has built-in bulb shields, since the tip is unpainted.

$84 from amazon (for both High and low) is a lot cheaper than HID kits. Bulbs are rated to last longer than many non-high performance 9005/9006.

 

[Jeff_in_VABch]

Originally Posted By: Ursae_Majoris
According to the Oregon statue, aftermarket HIDs are illegal, they fail to pass OSR 816.057 and OSR 816.0510.

Purple HIDs also fail to pass OSR 816.053.


I dont see any of those code sections. Where are they?

Did you make up those sections?

http://www.leg.state.or.us/ors/816.html


Originally Posted By: Ursae_Majoris

Installing aftermarket HIDs in housing not designed for it illigal according to Federal Standard 108, S7.8.5.3 :
"S7.8.5.3 Visual/optical aiming. Each visually/optically aimable headlamp shall be designed...

http://www.fmcsa.dot.gov/rules-regulations/administration/fmcsr/fmcsrruletext.aspx?reg=571.108


Once again, you are making up information and also taking it out of context.

You are the exact type of member that should be banned from BITOG.

 

[Jeff_in_VABch]

Originally Posted By: Scott_Tucker
I'm pretty sure the legality of HID's has been argued to death on this site. I think the bottom line is, in the US they are NOT LEGAL.


Assuming you are talking about aftermarket HID, there are 50 US states, each with different law. It is impossible to make your blanket statement without reviewing the applicable law.

As for federal law/DOT, there is a specification provided that governs headlamps design. The only way to determine if a headlamp with whatever lighting source is compliant would be to perform the specified test procedure. No person can just look at a headlamp beam pattern and determine if it is compliant without an instrumented test. How often is that going to be ordered to prosecute a case? And even then, not all reflector assemblies with HID bulbs will fail.

 

[Ursae_Majoris]

Those sections are in the excerpt your posted. Let me help you understand it.

The title has 816.05.

Then you have 10 points after that. If I were to cite point 1, then I would reference 816.051. I cited points 7 and 10, so I referenced 816.05.7 and 816.05.10.

One talks about the cut off restrictions, which HID in reflectors not designed for them cannot achieve. Another says it is illegal to modify the headlight housing and parts of it with parts not originally designed for this particular housing, making projector retrofits illegal.

Point 3 says that light has to be white, thus making purple HID illegal, so I referenced OSR 816.05.3

As far as my reference to the Federal code, please, read it again. It specifies exact the cut off height/brightness and "squirrel spotters"; if your modified light fails to meet these standards, it is illegal.

You challenged me, I answered in a professional and polite manner. Lay off the personal attacks. You made the choice to install the aftermarket HIDs, do not expect me to approve of your behavior, if plain reading of the law (in MY opinion) you had posted makes it illegal. BTW DOT code calls HIDs "arc discharge", not HID, if you do a keyword search in the link I posted.

BTW, why do you post Oregon code when you live in VA? Surely Virginia has its own code?

 

[mikered30]

Daniel Stern lighting and why HIDs are illegal:

http://www.danielsternlighting.com/tech/bulbs/Hid/conversions/conversions.html

 

[Cujet]

I love the "old school" HIR bulbs. They are simply great. In fact, I like them more than the high end HID setups. Mostly due to the excellent color temperature and practical illumination.

Ebay HID ballasts don't work well when repeatedly switched on/off. But the high end ones do quite well.

I'll also add that a nice set of after-market driving lights is a big plus.

There is also another interesting option now. I recently installed an LED, PAR36 landing light (whelen parmethius) in my Cessna. It has a really nice 10 degree light spread, which is wider than a spot light, but narrower than a flood. I tried it with a battery on my motorcycle (a street legal KTM 380 with dual HID's). It was fantastic!! Better than both HID's.

There are some really good LED lamps now. But, you must do the research to find which ones are best.

 

[Scott_Tucker]

I believe the first thing I am going to try is the 9011 HIR's modified to fit my 9005 highs. This will keep the DRL's operational too, correct?

I had another thought. My car has factory fog lamps. I used them in the fog and can't say they worked too well. I think they are there more for looks. If I installed HIDs in the foglamps do you think they would provide enough light for driving lights? Currently the fog lamps only work when the low beams are on and shut off when you turn on the highs. I would need to rewire them so they only come on with the high beams, which is well within my skill level. That way I don't blind anyone. I would also be able to shut them off completely with the switch. Any thoughts on this?

 

[sciphi]

Originally Posted By: Scott_Tucker
I believe the first thing I am going to try is the 9011 HIR's modified to fit my 9005 highs. This will keep the DRL's operational too, correct?

I had another thought. My car has factory fog lamps. I used them in the fog and can't say they worked too well. I think they are there more for looks. If I installed HIDs in the foglamps do you think they would provide enough light for driving lights? Currently the fog lamps only work when the low beams are on and shut off when you turn on the highs. I would need to rewire them so they only come on with the high beams, which is well within my skill level. That way I don't blind anyone. I would also be able to shut them off completely with the switch. Any thoughts on this?


Yes, the HIR 9011's will function as DRL.

Fogs aren't meant for distance. They're meant for seeing up close at low speed. Driving lights that go in the place of the fogs are meant for distance vision, and would do a much better job of lighting up the road far ahead.

 

[GatorJ]

Originally Posted By: mikered30
Daniel Stern lighting and why HIDs are illegal:

http://www.danielsternlighting.com/tech/bulbs/Hid/conversions/conversions.html


^^^This.^^^ Anyone arguing about the contrary is simply incorrect. Stern is the man when it comes to automotive lighting.

And, yes, aftermarket HID kits are illegal in ALL 50 states.

 

[Tonystewart]

Check theretrofitsource

 

[Cujet]

Originally Posted By: GatorJ
Originally Posted By: mikered30
Daniel Stern lighting and why HIDs are illegal:

http://www.danielsternlighting.com/tech/bulbs/Hid/conversions/conversions.html


^^^This.^^^ Anyone arguing about the contrary is simply incorrect. Stern is the man when it comes to automotive lighting.

And, yes, aftermarket HID kits are illegal in ALL 50 states.


Stern may be the man when it comes to automotive lighting. But, if you follow his advice, you won't have significantly improved light output.

Sorry, but when I need large quantities of light, I go to those who are actually accomplishing such feats and use what they use. Daniel advocates using lackluster, old school, moderate output bulbs. Technology has marched on, products have specifications and what he promotes is at the low end of the output scale.

For example, my SR90 LED flashlight has more "out the front" lumens than Daniels brightest bulb.

How's this? 14,000 Lumens, no hot spots, smooth beam, instant on, light weight, long life:

And, for those who don't know, most halogen low beams are 500-700 lumens "out the front" and HID lows are well under 1200 real world lumens OTF. High beams are up to about 1000 lumens OTF.

The best modern cars produce about 4000 lumens on high beam, with all bulbs burning. The average car, about 2500 with all bulbs. The light bar above 14,000! And, that's just one small light bar.

 

[Vikas]

Something tells me that the lightbar shown above would go well with my own executive jet I suspect that what you are showing costs couple of orders of magnitude more than a typical car headlight bulb costs. Can you suggest something which is more realistic?

 

[ffhdriver]

I've also found that Stern is wrong IMO on how to aim non projector fog lights.

 

[Smokescreen]

D.S operates/advises within the parameters of the law. Sure you can shine a set of searchlights in front of your car and of course it would be brighter, there are industry approved standards that headlamps must operate within to be safe. D.S. lives and breathes beam patterns, projection, lamp and bulb construction and operation. As well he has knowledge of how lighting interacts with the human eye. He pretty much is the authority on it, everyone else has already accepted that.

For what its worth the construction and beam pattern of many older lamps are much better than new ones. Hurling a huge glob of light in front of you doesn't make it better, most of the time its worse, much worse, but more light is usually perceived as better to the unlearned.

By endorsing or advocating use of illegal lighting systems on this forum you are breaching forum rule #5.

 

[Garak]

Originally Posted By: Smokescreen
For what its worth the construction and beam pattern of many older lamps are much better than new ones. Hurling a huge glob of light in front of you doesn't make it better, most of the time its worse, much worse, but more light is usually perceived as better to the unlearned.


That's something that should be read twice, and a third time, until it's understood. People like Daniel Stern and others have tested automotive lights and actually measured effectiveness on the road. This goes beyond purely numerical things like lumens (effective, but not the whole picture) or the subjective "It looks so much brighter" notion.

There are plenty of weak looking headlights out there that actually do illuminate objects far down the road, just as they were designed to do. They just don't make a pretty blue tint, melt wires, or blind oncoming traffic as they do so.

One can nitpick all one wants about how either the European or North American specifications are deficient in one way or another. Generally speaking, they're pretty effective, and the extra-legal nonsense we see out there is decidedly not an improvement.

 

[Vikas]

+1

There are actually people out on the internet who have gone the way of illegal mod i.e. HID in the reflector and have realized that even though they have ton of light in front of them after adjusting to reduce the glare, it does not really help them see better. As a matter of fact, their ability to see is decreased. AND they have came out and said that on public forum. That kind of honesty is rare on the internet.

 

[Brick B-Body]

No question Daniel Stern's website has good information within it. However most of it looks to be from the early to mid 2000s. How much as automotive lighting advanced in that time?

It's no different that us looking over oil and filter info and tests from 8 to 10 years ago. While it maybe useful, it is out of date and probably doesn't reflect the current state of what's available.

Are there other sites out there with similar information that is more current?

 

[Garak]

Originally Posted By: Brick B-Body
No question Daniel Stern's website has good information within it. However most of it looks to be from the early to mid 2000s. How much as automotive lighting advanced in that time?


Of course, automotive lighting has advanced in the interim. However, the standards have remained the same. Any advancements we've seen are mainly reflected in original equipment, such as LEDs and the greater use of HIDs in "lower end" vehicles.

It's just as illegal, dangerous, and silly to install improper equipment now as it was then. Year ago, what did we see? Plenty of over-wattage bulbs and lots of blue bulbs. What do we see today? The same thing, plus plenty of substandard HID kits.

 

[Cujet]

Originally Posted By: Vikas
Something tells me that the lightbar shown above would go well with my own executive jet I suspect that what you are showing costs couple of orders of magnitude more than a typical car headlight bulb costs. Can you suggest something which is more realistic?


Ha ha,

Not really a "jet" light. That light bar, and the individual lights themselves, are becoming quite popular with the off road crowd. They are incredible, and if you look, they can be found on that auction site for a very reasonable cost.