Wanted to share the setup on my truck...

[boro]

Originally, my 96 Chevy S10 LT had sealed beams on it, but there was no way I was going to settle for that...

After working my way from one thing to the other, I eventually settled on E-Code H4 conversion housings and some 90/130W halogens...

(first two are low, last is high beam. Light above cutoff in second pic is just light reflecting off the dash onto the windshield)

I really need to take better pics now that I have my new camera.

But yes, I can see...and with the sharp cutoff so can everyone else...

I had the exact lumen ratings at one point or another but I forgot, I think the low beams are around 1800 lumens and the high beams are 3400 lumens. With sealed beams, when people passed by me with their high beams on and I flashed them, they usually ignored me. That doesn't seem to happen anymore.
.
.
.

 

[hate2work]

So now it will be easier for you to blind oncoming drivers with your bright lights. Great.

 

[Jimmy9190]

I don't think it's right to condemn the OP for trying to improve the inadequate lighting on his truck. The pics of his low beams don't look any worse than most oncoming lights I have seen recently, and they sure don't look any worse than the HID lights I have seen coming in my direction.

From the pics it looks like the man lives in an area where he just might need good lighting on his truck. I imagine there are a good many deer out on the Alabama roads at night, not to mention any number of other critters dumb enough to step out in front of an oncoming truck.

I hit a small doe in my truck in broad daylight. It was not much bigger than your average good-sized dog and it still did $3,500.00 in damage to my truck.

I don't blame anyone for trying to improve the lights on their vehicle if the original lights are inadequate. I am trying to get my own headlights to work better myself but I won't do anything that will intentionally blind any oncoming drivers. That's why I wired my new driving lights with a second relay to turn off my driving lights when I have my high beams on.

 

[Smokescreen]

While I applaud your efforts to improve your lighting by using good housings with proper cutoff and beam pattern, I have to say I am disappointed you used "For Off Road Only" illegal & over-wattage bulbs.

While the housings may maintain proper cutoff with the increased output on a wall surface, there is more to safe lighting than just cutoff. There is also reflected light from the road surface in dry and wet conditions that will expose oncoming traffic to unsafe levels of glare. This is just one reason why cars come out with a specified wattage for bulb type(in your case for H4 would be 60/55 watts 1650/1000 lumens) for the housing.

 

[boro]

These lights only put out 1800 lumens low beam guys. When held to the industry lighting standard of 12.8 volts the rating drops even lower to about 1600. That's only slightly higher than an H1, less than a 9005, 9012, and far less than an OE D2S or D2R bulb. Don't worry, no one is getting blinded.

Jimmy hit the nail on the head in saying that these are no worse than anything else you'll find on the road as far as low beams. I really only brought them up to new car standards.

The way that these DO perform in greater capacity than just about any halogen you'll find on the road is in the highbeam, where they put out more rated light than a D2S bulb. But I'm not going to be driving past people with my high beams on either.

And I do indeed live in the country...these lights have saved my truck a few times...
.
.
.

 

[boro]

Well I was going to edit my post but apparently I missed the time frame...

I would like to add that if you want to condemn my lights for their low beam output you'd have to condemn everyone with H1, 9005, 9012 HIR, H9, or any OE HID low beam. At least mine have a precise sharp cutoff as mandated by European standards. That's a lot more than can be said for most DOT reflector based headlamps.
.
.
.

 

[Smokescreen]

Bulb specs are designed to be safe for that housing. Painting all bulbs that have similar lumen outputs is not accurate or really justifiable. I could understand if you went to a higher output bulb like those found here: http://store.candlepower.com/h4hb29003bulbs.html you would've chosen more prudently,but you have clearly chosen illegal over-wattage bulbs that are not found on any new car.

 

[boro]

These lamps are aftermarket conversions designed to be capable of running higher wattage bulbs while conforming to Euro beam pattern laws.

That being stated, and it being accepted that these lamps maintain precise pattern control with the more powerful bulbs (which they do), then comparing light output between units is completely justifiable.

I think we can all accept that these maintain a precise cutoff. If you don't believe that I will take as many pictures as it takes until you do.

That factor takes glare out of the equation. No more light is cast upward above the cutoff than any other halogen you'll encounter on the road. Perhaps even less considering Euro spec lamps are required NOT to cast any light upward while DOT lamps explicitly are.

If you want to consider reflection off of a wet surface then again, I state you will have to condemn every bulb I listed earlier. Light reflected off a surface in such a manner is no longer a factor of the housing but a factor only in the brightness of the bulb.

I am curious as to why this is garnering so much attention. I have yet to see anyone condemned for putting HIR2 bulbs in their 9006 DOT low beams which not only are brighter than mine to start but also placed in a FAR less precisely controlled housing.
.
.
.

 

[Smokescreen]

I am a proponent of good lighting. I agree a great many DOT lamps are not as good a Ecode ones as well. Its too bad one couldn't get a bulb that has legal low beam specs and a really great high beam output in one package. I can relate to you as I drive deer infested rural routes as well. I use aux high beams but not every car can do that and still look decent.

I agree that you have a great housing and with the proper spec'd bulb it would be formidable, it has great cutoff and probably great beam pattern as well. That was never the issue. One issue is the amount of light cast down on the road however.

There are higher wattage performance bulbs (like the ones on the link) and then there is just plain illegal. You are putting nearly double the wattage bulb of even the higher performing legal bulb, making it illegal anywhere. There comes a point where any housing (even projectors) optics be overwhelmed from too much light being produced from a bulb. One area of concern is internal reflections can ensue at a certain point contaminating an otherwise good setup.

As a side note, I don't advocate HIR2 bulbs in 9006 enclosures either. Many 9006 bulb enclosures are poorly designed and the optics can't handle the increased lumens like you said. I am not a fan of OEM HID lamps in any way, but since they come from factory that way from every country, there is little to be done until regulations change. Just because others do it doesn't change the rules. Take some pics from oncoming car point of view and post them up, wet and dry low beams with a stock bulb and your Off Road bulbs, and then we can see.

 

[boro]

These seem to be able to handle the extra lumens fairly well. My desire from the start was to be considerate to other drivers while improving my own vision.

I'd be glad to post a comparison up for you later this evening or sometime this weekend perhaps. However changing bulbs out is somewhat of a pain as the entire front end has to be removed including the headlamps and thus everything re-aimed. Would you be willing to accept instead a comparison, wet and dry, with a 9006 low beam equipped car on a concrete driveway? 01 Accord or 09 Lucerne, take your pick. I will maintain the same shutter speed and aperture settings between pictures.
.
.
.

 

[Smokescreen]

That is quite a bit of work to change out some bulbs you're right. My brother has a similar model (S10 Blazer).

On a double divided highway it wouldn't be as bad but on a single undivided, there is no where to run visually. Its too bad you didn't do legal H4 bulbs in the E codes and aux driving, then there would've been no issue.

Sure. It would be interesting even though they are different vehicles, two different heights. The naked eye or photometric machine would be a better measure though.

On a side note I tried running modded 9005's in a 9006 housing (a cheap lumen equivalent of HIR2s) and it turned out to have the same correct beam pattern, but small aberrations materialized about 3 feet up that were not there before. It was not so noticeable on a clear day, but any little bit of precipitation or hint of fog and it was very apparent and distracting. So I switched back to stock, it wasn't worth it despite the extra light.

 

[boro]

Alright, well I decided to go ahead and do this test in the early evening instead of night for various reasons...a little ambient lighting should give you a little more relativity between pictures...

For all these pictures, the camera settings were as follows: 1/50 sec. shutter speed, F2.8, ISO 1600. Truck vs. 01 Accord with 9006s. Both cars' headlamps are aimed according to spec.

Let's start with what opposing traffic sees...

Note how the 9006 appears to have at least as much if not MORE glare than my 90W H4's...that is directly related to the poor light control of the DOT housing...

Now for the reflected light...

Unfortunately my driveway doesn't reflect anything...at all. Wet or dry. So I had to improvise with a distractingly shiny metal object I found. I placed it in the beam area and moved the camera so that the light was reflecting directly from the headlamp off the metal and to the camera in both shots.

Distance shot first.

Now because it's hard to see the reflection, here's a zoom spot. I didn't move myself from where I was standing in the above shots before zooming.

The truck is definitely putting more light on the ground, but light is not necessarily reflecting off the object more with my truck than with the Accord...

Hopefully this sheds some light (pun intended) on my stance with these. We're talking 9005 levels of light output here on low beam with a well controlled beam pattern. Nothing particularly new or revolutionary, and certainly not blinding to anyone.

What I will agree with you on is that it is in no way legal, however I hope we can both agree that my setup is at the very least no more bothersome to oncoming traffic than a 1000 lumen 9006 equipped 2001 Honda Accord.
.
.
.

 

[Seguino]

I think you are going to find out that those 130W bulbs burn out really quickly. If that's the case, and, as you stated, it's a PITA to change bulbs, you may be better off with something like a Osram Rallye bulb 75/60W or 85/80W for way better life and still lots of light output.

 

[Smokescreen]

Thanks for putting some pics up. I wish I could say that they answered either side though. There are many factors that should be considered like: You need to be much further away from the vehicle to capture the reflective index of pavement and too much ambient light...but I guess unless you are in the oncoming car and seeing the effects in real life, it doesn't really matter.

Seguino does have a point. Most over-wattage bulbs are over-driven burners with a short life span.

If the first pics of this thread are any indication of the kinds of roads you drive on, you obviously have some roads with tight tree lines that don't give much notice for wildlife. We want our lights to do everything; low beams to have great foreground light, great cutoff, but also great distance coverage on high beams. There is only so much a single enclosure can do effectively.

If it was my vehicle, I might have done the headlamp upgrade like you did (except have legitimate bulbs), or I would have left it stock and invested in some quality driving lights driving lamps like some Cibie Oscars 180 series. http://www.danielsternlighting.com/products/products.html that give a beam pattern like this: http://www.cibie.net/cibie_models.htm. Alas, you have obviously put some coin into your setup and are pretty happy with it so when you replace the bulbs try to go with some legitimate top quality ones to get the most out of the great housings you've got like the Osram Rallye bulb like Seguino mentioned. Often a well engineered bulb with a precisely wound and placed filament will capture the maximum potential of a good housing more than an over-wattage mid grade bulb will.

 

[Hokiefyd]

I like the setup. I agree with some that I probably would have used "normal" H4 bulbs in it (probably a reasonably-priced Sylvania Xtravision or similar), but have no problem with the different housing. Can you post a picture looking straight into one of the housings (with the light OFF), so we can see how the reflector looks, and how the optics are designed.

Thanks!

 

[boro]

I can indeed...

Complete with a dead bug splat, no less. Chrome inside is just a flat bowl, optics are controlled through the lens fluting and of course the bulb's own internal glare shield.

As per the Osram Rallye high efficacy bulb suggestion, I have thought about switching to such a bulb though not so much for more controlled light (they actually put out more light on low beam than my bulbs do, though less on high) but to reduce the strain on my alternator during low beam idling operation.

As a more long term plan, I'm actually having an opportunity to switch to this front end very soon:

Which will give me the opportunity to go with the 9006/9005 route and give me many more options, including the ability to run a "quad beam setup" where lows stay on with highs. I'm thinking of running a relayed standard 9006 and a relayed 9011 HIR with these.

But that's just conjecture as I don't know what parts are at my disposal yet...

As much as I knock the DOT lights (and they do suck) for their beam pattern, they do have an extreme amount of advantage in width over E Code patterns.

My lighting saga with this truck is never ending.
.
.
.

 

[UG_Passat]

imo, stick to what you have now.

Going to the Blazer setup will be considered to be a downgrade when it comes to what matters, the beam pattern

 

[Hokiefyd]

Boro, thanks for posting the pics.

Though I really like seeing how different lamp housings control and handle optics (and this is a neat one), I'm with you in that I prefer an SAE-type beam pattern, especially with projector housings, where you can have a very flat upper cutoff. Features can be designed-in to the housing (or projector) to allow a controlled amount of light upward to light up road signs. What I don't like about many ECE-type beam patterns, and yours doesn't seem to be too bad in that regard, is your driver side mirror will be LIT UP by a car in the left lane if it's got lamps with a particularly strong ECE pattern. Especially with projectors, and especially with HID projectors. The full intensity of the beam is right up into your mirror. Because of the somewhat diffused light from your housings, it doesn't appear like it'd be a big problem out of your particular housings.

Seems like for halogen reflector housings, I like/tolerate ECE-type patterns, but in projector housings, and especially HID ones, I greatly prefer SAE-type patterns. I reckon that much of Europe doesn't necessarily have a lot of 4-lane highways, or most driving was traditionally done on 2-lane roads, which is why this type of beam pattern has historically been preferred. In the United States, where we do have a lot of 4-lane roadways, I think the SAE pattern is safer.

 

[Hokiefyd]

How 'bout this in your rearview mirror? Ick.

 

[Landrew]

Is that a reflector housing aimed properly drivers side and aimed up passenger side? Good cut off but just a little high on the passenger side (by a few feet!)
Having a small car and set up even lower than stock and HID's my cutoff is on the bumper and with lifted trucks at the diff. If I had the same HID projectors in my truck it would not be as favorable to oncomers.
Also being in a low car I am subject to all kinds of rear glare from even a Civic and so am sometimes partial to "strong lights" but I also sympathize with the needs of the driver wanting to see better. I live out on the woods and with trees and animals all around vision is important for safety at the slight inconveniance of others

Is that fabricated or stock - your photo above, what vehicle and setup?