Soon2BxB

thats one of the silliest statements i have ever heard ... hids dont have a signifigant gain ? haha are u kidding me ?? you have never driven with them .. thats apparent...

tell ya what man .. my new retro is being worked on .. when its done .. u come take my box for a drive ... then get back in your car and tell me that same statement again ...

thats like saying that theres no difference between a flashlight and a flood light

hids are EXTREMELY superior to halogen and everyone knows it

and the money was better spent on hids then any other mod on my car .. it GREATLY affects how safely i can drive down the road and see things...

but i dont expect you to care.. you are happy with stock ... but if you ever went to hid .. ud never look back

squarepants

whats with you people and lights,what the hell you people want to see with those bright lights you all sound like old people who can't see well at night.........lol

TorneoDude

Agreed that 8000 Kelvin is less yellow light which reflects better off all objects but 8,000K hardly qualifies for "garbage". "Less" than 4300K or 6000K but hardly less than halogen even at 4100K. It's a hell of a lot whiter-looking blue than the view of the front of the xB or the zoomed-in photos would suggest. If you want to get a truer idea of beam color, you have to look at the photos that are not zoomed. The zoomed ones make the light look green since the camera was set for daytime landscapes. (I explained this in detail in the picture captions.) 8000K does have a bluish white tint but it is still highly illuminative on all surfaces and lights reflectorized surfaces (like lane markers and signs) like an atom bomb. It is not as green looking as the zoom photos suggest.

Gee that's funny. Where did I read most of that before? Possibly my own quote much earlier in the same thread? BTW, natural daylight is about 5200-5400K so 6000K is actually closer to optimum light output than 4100-4300K.


You said:
You answered your own question: "...blue light is not as strong...". I was very specific that with HID producing approx 3x the amount of lumens as a halogen bulb, I felt 4300 or 6000K was actually excessive for a 2800K designed reflector. Spread across the reflector surface, in spite of the cut-off, I was concerned that it might be too bright for oncoming traffic at 4300 or 6000K. Even at 8000K though, it is a significant increase in light output. (I had 4100K SilverStars in before.)




Wrong.

You just said that OEM HID's only come in 4100-4300K and yet you want to suggest that my clearly non OE 8000K tubes are rebased DS1 or DS2. Think about the contradiction there. Philips and Osram are not making non OE color tubes for the aftermarket with OE bases. These tubes are Japanese aftermarket and were factory assembled onto H4 bases. I never claimed that they were OE or Toyota but they did not start life as a Osram 4300K on a DS1 base. They are part of a complete kit... or actually TWO complete aftermarket kits including custom ballasts, harnesses and bulbs that were designed specifically to retrofit an H4/9003 halogen system.



http://www.hidretro.com/pictures/pages/page05/09.jpg
This photo extolling the virtues of a transplanted s2000 projector is no 20 feet from the doors; looks more like about 5.

Soon2BxB

first off ... the mesasuremetn is much farther then 5 feet.. i actually just had my friend go measure for ____s.. its 16 feet ...

i apologize for the rebased comment .. it slipped my mind for one second that you were using 8000k bulbs.


and as for the OEM comment about 4100-4300k being optimal .. dude dont make it sound like i learned that from you .. ive been into hids for years....

for someone with as much knowledge as you have .. i would expect YOU of all people to understand the TRUE benefit of projector hid and retrofitting .. i dont understand why u cop out with that hid kit .. when all that money .. could have been put towards OEM hid .. which would yield MUCH MUCH better results.. better reliability (oem components .. not taiwan crap)

but as i said before.. if you are happy - thats all that matters


and oh yeah

is this 20 ft picture good enough for you (when i said they were 16 feet.. i was referring to the ACURA TL pictures)

here is s2k at 20 ft- notice that even at 20 ft.. the beam is still going farther left to right and how even the light distro is .. show me one reflector that can do that



now go take a look at your pic lol .. and you can honestly sit here adn tell me .. yours comes even CLOSE to being as good as that ?? i think not

nomis_nehc

damn, long long posts. so i will just skip and post what i think... tc lights look hot. i want it. =)

Soon2BxB

and why do you keep dodging my question

HAVE YOU EVER DRIVEN A CAR EQUIPPED WITH HID PROJECTORS .. ????

you can not accurately judge a cars light from being next to it on the road... get behind the wheel .. see for yourself ...

how can you make an argument with me regarding projectors if you have no experience with them ? ... i have both experience in reflector and projector hid


thats like you saying A is better tasting then B .. without having tried B ....

oh yeah .. heres another pic showing just how crappy hid projectors are .. this is a pic taken of acura TSX projectors

god look at how crappy that wide dispersed beam looks ... sigh ... i just dont see how u can argue that hid relfectors are better then projectors

take some pics of your lights similar to that one and the one above

lets see what you got going on

FrankenScion

This is easily the the most long-winded string I've seen yet.
I'm still digging the Peter avatar though.

uncompiled

Owww... Sssssst... Owww... Sssssst... Owww...

Clearly, you both understand the benefits and disadvantages of HID. HID is brighter, it has lower overall power consumption, etc. On the other hand, HID lighting systems are complex, expensive, and as you both have said, higher color temperatures (like 8000K) are more prone to scatter.

Neither HID or Halogen are perfect solutions and likewise projectors and reflectors are not perfect either. The effect of "glaring" is compounded when you're talking about projector optics -- as Soon2BxB has mentioned, HID projectors such as the Honda S2000 have a very sharp cutoff, so it's difficult to say that projectors such as the Honda S2000 or 2005 Acura TL can produce glare using the conventional definition. Glare is usually described as stray light that overlays the image focused on the driver's retina, but there is another type of glare: "apparent glare" or "discomfort glare". This is caused when the intensity of light exceeds a person's threshold for personal comfort. I think that the real problem with HID projectors isn't that there is "glare" coming from a point source, but because there is such an intense contrast at the cutoff line that it is discomforting to some drivers. The darkness outside of the beam can help to create the illusion that the beam is even more intense than it really is and since a xenon bulb is approximately 3x brighter than a standard halogen bulb, that's pretty damned bright.

I don't know how many of you have encountered this, but some people have flashed me in my xB with my lowbeams on with stock lights and bulbs. This is just another example of "discomfort glare". HID is a new technology and because of this, it's "eye-catching" -- and that makes the situation even worse. When someone is coming at you in a BMW X5 with HID headlights, many drivers are more prone to look at the headlights, rather than the road in front of them. There was a study by Aktan and Schnell at UIowa a while back that showed this. I don't know about anyone else, but I'll admit that when I see an Audi or a BMW in oncoming traffic at night... it's hard not to make a double-take because it stands out so much.


I think the conflict that appears in this thread comes from looking at the same issue in different ways. Soon2BxB seems to be more concerned with the lighting system's performance. While lighting performance is an issue, there is also this issue of percieved glare and I think that that is why TorneoDude chose 8000K over something in the 4300K-5000K range.

To be honest, I personally wouldn't have chosen 8000K because I think of it in the same way that I think of blue tinted halogen bulbs, but I respect his decision. I just don't want to see this thread become one of those "linux versus windows" type of arguments.

liquidscion

wow

liquidscion

i need some hid's fur mee..

hidretro_com

This thread can go on for months without a resolution. There are a few misconceptions when it comes to HID and optics in this post/forum.

Color Temperature and HID:

Although current generation of HID equipped vehicles (OEM HID) uses ~4100K, it was not always the case. The first generation of automotive discharge lighting came in a ~5400K version (1991 BMW 7 Series and later then 1996 Lincoln Mark VIII). Subsequent generation (1997 BMW 5 Series as well as others) used the lower temperature 4300K Osram bulb and 4100K Philips bulb as it was determined to be a better color temperature to drive with and has remained so to today.

With automotive HID the higher up the temperature scale the lower the amount of visible light (the amount of light energy generated is still the same; just in a different part of the spectrum). Take for example the standard Philips 4100K bulb and the non-standard Philips 6000K bulb (does not pass the regulatory definition of “white light” so are not legal for use on US or European roads). Philips rates the intensity of the 4100K at ~3200 lumens and the 6000K bulb at ~2400 lumens. There is no official rating for bulbs higher then 6000K since Philips does not make one. Higher color temperature is perceived to be more intense then lower temperature when it is in fact not.

The human eye is quite sensitive to higher color temperatures (blue end of the spectrum); which is one of the reasons why motorists will tend to stare at an HID equipped vehicle longer then they should (thus causing eye fatigue and “glare”) aside from the obvious out of the ordinary factor. To choose a color temperature above 6000K to minimize this is not only an error in judgment but also counterproductive since it has the exact opposite. For those more interested in the subject, you can read a few papers written by a colleague of mine.

http://www.danielsternlighting.com/t...nversions.html
http://dmses.dot.gov/docimages/pdf82/176157_web.pdf


Projector vs. Reflector optics:

Out of the two, the projector optics is more efficient at using the light given to it; less of the light is wasted while producing a very controlled beam. Reflectors though are capable of projecting the light much further (distance) and in a higher concentration (spot lights for example). Given that the discussion is on automotive low beams, the reflector is at a disadvantage here. If the discussion was about high beams or spot lights, the reflector optics would be the clear winner. The two optics have their weak examples and their strong examples though the projector optics has more potential then reflector optics in the field of automotive low beams.

TorneoDude

uncompiled You got it 100%

I have never said that reflector systems are generically preferable to all HID systems. What I am in disagreement with is 2BxB suggesting that projector systems are just hands-down "superior". I think that projectors have some "problems" that reflectors do not have and vice-versa.


I concur with uncompiled's statement about getting "flashed" with the stock halogen bulbs in the OE xB reflectors. This used to happen all the time even though the cut-off was still aimed as low as it is now. If you examine the stock H4 bulb (or look at the photos at the beginning of my album at http://groups.msn.com/2005ToyotaTorn...nw?albumlist=2 ) you can see how the small chromed reflector for the low beam is far less effective of blocking waste-light from striking the bottom of the reflector.
Since I switched to HID at 8000K about 2 months ago, I have not had a single car flash me. My choice would frankly have been diamond-white 6000K as they do offer more useable light and are available from the same supplier but I was concerned about the other drivers. I felt that 8000K was a reasonable compromise between the triple lumens of going HID and the useable light reduction as the color headed toward the UV spectrum and useless.

As HIDretro pointed out, the lumens drop off as the K goes up the scale. The increased sensitivity to colors in the blue spectrum is interesting and I understand the theory. However, what this opthamalogical study does not take into account is that 4300K light still contains the same amount of blue light mixed in with the rest of the spectrum (yellow and red) which is why the total amount of lumens is significantly higher in the K-range with a more-complete color spectrum. I would suggest that looking into a headlight with 4300K at 3000 lumens might still actually be more intense than the "more sensitive" 8000K at say 2000 lumens. Again, I know that looking into my xB headlights with 4100K SilverStar halogens WAS definitely more uncomfortable than the current HID's BUT I can't say how much of that is due to the improved shielding provided by the HID's without equipment to verify this. I could offer a comparison if I order some 4300K or 6000K arc-tubes in the future.

Now that I already have the 8000K and have seen how well this particular set is shielded and how uniform the light pattern is with a clearly-defined cut-off, I suspect I might have been okay with 6000K (or even 4300K).
Still I have lots of very useable light as-is, so I have no plans to refit with two sets in a lower K-range unless I run into a legal problem because of the definition of "white light". (I may email my supplier to see how much a set of tubes-only in the 6000K in the H4 HI/LOW and the H4 LOW only would cost just for grins.)


I want to thank HIDretro for weighing-in on this discussion. Thank you also for the reference to Daniel Stern. I have seen his insightful and educational posts in connection with my Mercedes hobby's BBS and mailing list threads. Although I do not always agree with Daniel 100%, I do respect his knowledge of the science in his profession. I am known to quote him and link his website at times.

I would swear though, that based on principles of physics that the essential characteristics of light emission between reflector and projector seem reversed. Since the reflector by its very nature tends to spread the light at the source as it bounces of the reflector, there should be high foreground intensity with less distance intensity. The light emitted from a projector proceeds from a much more concentrated source and should result in a narrower more-focused shaft of light that has to be spread outward by the convex lense in a true conical beam. This focus should create increased distance vision.


Thanks to 2bxB for the latest pix.

The residential street-shot is very good for making comparisons. At your convenience, how about a shot of your projectors in the same context?

I would discount some of the merit of the suggested benefits to projectors based on the driveway photo. I do not feel it makes a strong argument against my perception of deficient foreground lighting with projectors because of the highly reflective concrete and the fact that the surface is sloping upward into the path of the light. I criticize (and criticized in an earlier post) the intense "aura" at the cut-off as an issue. This is what causes that "twinkle" that you identified as coming from the light refracting off of the projector's internal shielding and which is clearly evident in that photo. This photo also clearly shows a concave area between the front of the car and the beginning of the illumination-area in conjunction with a strongly refracted arc "aura" at the lower border.

I would also appreciate some clarity on your issue(s) with the lower photo. You said:I assume you meant reflector where you said projector and the picture was of an Acura with HID capsule units and not projectors? You are saying that these HID's are "crappy" because the beam is too widely dispersed (as in too much lighting to the shoulders)? I thought you stated earlier though that projectors are even wider. Maybe you could clarify.

I will try (in the not too far distant future) to find a similar context to take a couple of digital snaps of my HID in the OE capsules. I'll need to find a similar residential area as my home is in a location with no streetlights, sidewalks, or parked cars (to reflect off of) to provide similar basis for comparison. It may also take some experimentation for me to learn to properly use my Olympus C4000Z for night-shots like this and get the pictures to come out accurate.


TO EVERYONE ELSE who has been following this thread...

I personally apologize for subjecting anyone to these sometimes painfully-long replies!

However.... I for one think that this is the point to having a discussion on a subject like this. I appreciate 2bxB making his case for projectors and any "proof" he cares to supply. As long as the responses don't degenerate into personal attacks, the contrasting viewpoints are giving me an opportunity to bounce my impressions about projectors off of an obviously ardent advocate. Hopefully the benefit to the readers of this SL thread is that everyone will be able to pick-out the provable facts from the posts and be better informed before spending a chunk of money on something that doesn't perform as they hoped. I have yet to take personal offense at anything 2bxB has said to this point (regardless how "spirited" it may have come across).


For those who are uninterested in the discussion...
I have personally never understood why people would read long BBS posts about something they are not interested in and then complain. I have never felt "forced" to read a post. I would still extend my apology those folks who fall in this category but respectfully offer that they just skip the long posts or the thread altogether and go to another one more to their liking. Afterall, reading these things is still voluntary, right?

hidretro_com

When we’re speaking of HID bulbs with the mentioned color temperature, the territory occupied by the 8000K bulb is more in the blue part of the spectrum then the territory occupied by the 4300K bulb. The 4300K bulb centers lower on the scale and its ranges goes up and down the spectrum from that position. With the 8000K bulb, the center is higher up the scale and its ranges go up and down from that position. The majority of the 8000K bulb’s territory is within the blue spectrum with the lower end near the white border and the majority of the 4300K bulb’s territory is within the white spectrum with the higher end near the border of the blue spectrum.

6000K does not pass the US (or European) regulatory definition of white light.

It would depend on the optics; if we are speaking of low beam optics used on automobiles, yes and no. In the reflector assembly (the xB for example) the light is sent out as a massive radiant from the reflected light source (from the reflector) to the destination. In the projector assembly, much of the same happens but with an additional step. The projector’s reflector channels the light into a focal point that is later spread out by the lens.

Here’s a crude drawing of what I mean:


The reflector optics takes a median route while the projector optics takes an extreme route; the extremely tight focused and intense light gets extremely dispersed into the intended beam.

TorneoDude

Understood.

However, I'm less concerned with the DOT than I am at the issue of whether the color will be noticeably non-compliant enough to draw a citation or fail an annual DMV inspection. With the presence of 5400K OE 1st generation systems, 6000K may be close enough to "look" more compliant.

What I meant was that I might likely keep my 8000K unless I start drawing traffic citations as a result.




Point taken. 8000K does still have higher center in the blue spectrum (hence the color) so it has to contain blues above those in the 4300K.

I believe even Daniel concedes that there is (was? 06/02) still some debate as to whether the bluer colors actually create more glare or just a greater "perception" of glare. One research argument was it was because the color makes it stand out as unique against the other headlights and attracts drivers to take a longer look. I happen to agree with the researchers who feel that this holds more merit than the suggestion that it is because humans are more sensitive to blue hues. I recall very similar reactions when halogen sealed beams first began replacing the standard tungsten filament units. Halogen cars were easily identifiable because of the "whiter" light and there were rampant complaints about how those "damned new headlights" were so blindingly bright. Built-in OE amber or clear foglights often got the similar reception because they were percieved only as 4x lights on at once (which used to be only possible with a 4-headlamp system on HI-beam before). Of course Stern is clear that he feels ALL BLUE-LOOKING lighting, OE or otherwise, should be BANNED. (This because even "legal" 4300K systems look blueish at the source and Daniel feels this compels people to buy/build illegal systems in order to imitate the "new" look.)

I think alot of newer vehicles may be undeservedly getting a bad rap about "glare" because they have higher performance lighting. I've long lost count of how many times I had to look to the shoulder with oncoming cars with perfectly mundane OE lighting simply because they had added trunk-load, had filmy/dirty lenses, had a broken adjuster, or simply changed a lamp themselves and turned the adjuster instead of a mounting screw. I have had some unique glare problems with projector-equipped cars on uneven road surfaces but I can't say that, owing to the stiff suspension on the xB, that I haven't cast some flashing glare both with the stock halides and the new HID's. What I'm exploring is if the projector isn't more culpable because of the intensely concentrated beam source and the refraction off of the cut-off shielding.

The posts to this thread here are definitely widening my understanding. Thank you HIDretro and 2bxB for your posts, pictures, and the chart/illustration.

It has been a while since I reviewed Stern's NHTSA disertation. (He put it into PDF form back in June of 2002). I was not really into HID back then but into E-code halogen lighting for my Benzes. Thanks to your link, I was reminded that Daniel made it clear in other forums that it was virtually impossible to refit HID into stock lighting units that were photometrically designed/intended for filament bulbs. In fact the H4 lamp is luckier than most in that it at least has a filament orientation that matches the arc in the HID but even that is not necessarily enough to make it focus properly. Although I eluded to this in another post about how changing the light source could adversely affect light pattern and increase waste light, I had forgotten some of the specifics.

Thanks to that refresher, I can understand 2bxB's adamate adherance to retrofitting OEM equipment from other cars rather than trying to modify or relamp an OE reflector with non-OE equipment. Daniel Stern is in total agreement against changing anything about an OE lamp as he considers such mods reckless and irresponsible. Of course, I don't agree with Dan's rigid constructs on exactly how lamp design and use should be restricted, limited, and regulated but I respect his reasons.


Of value to the SL thread ...
was Stern's concern that he believes that even projectors that were designed for halogen use should not be used with HID's as their photometrics will skew with the filament-to-HID-arc orientation-mismatch among other incompatibilities.

So... The professional/expert word is that the H1? H3? dual projector sets being offered on eBay should not be adapted to HID even if they were 100% perfect* as halogen units (*It has been suggested that these are inferior untested aftermarket units that will have a "foglight" dispersion pattern rather that headlight pattern, so they may not be suitable as "headlights" with ANY light source; even standard halogen)


If I may dare a question...
In light of Daniel's point about the incompatibility of arc-lamps in halide-intended headlights, how do the reflector and/or projector headlights differ on the same car model between the halogen and HID units.

I believe there were identical Accord or Acura models that offered HID or standard halogen and the same for the Mercedes E-class (1998?). To the untrained eye, the headlamps looked the same on the E320 until they were lit. IF these really have significant reflector, projector, or lense differences, I think the similar overall appearance is likely what has promoted the impression that any headlamp can be upgraded with HID with no ill effects.

FrankenScion

Geez, what do you guys do for a living?

hidretro_com

Depending on your area, law enforcement officials are as unaware when it comes to automotive headlamps as most people out there. Most are not aware of which vehicles are HID equipped and which are not. The majority of the populous are not aware of what HID lighting really are, even those that drive vehicles equipped with them. It is a rarity to find an owner with more then the most basic of knowledge about their HID lighting system (beyond what they are told at the dealership).


Blue light has the tendency to refract more. Glare would depend on the individual person as well as the light source. A person more tolerant to the higher energy blue wave would not be affected as much as a person not tolerant/or familiar with that same blue source.

Without getting too deep into it......

In principal the projector optics would have less glare potential then the reflector optics though that is not always the case due to the individual owners, regulations and implementation.

Although the properties of the projector optics calls for a higher concentration of light through the threshold (projector lens), very little is lost to glare (cutoff shield minimizes it). The reflector optics has a lower concentration of light but a much larger threshold and loses more light to glare.

In practice though, most owners do not clean their headlamp lenses on a regular basis or even know that they should. Light from either optics (projector or reflector) will refract off the dirt and grim on the lenses and become a glare issue. Headlamps are also not always aimed correctly; most people do not have the knowledge or initiative. Since US headlamps are not required to have auto leveling headlamps, overload of the trunk is also another issue. Common sense would say that someone carrying a large load at night would aim their headlamps down to compensate but that is not always the case. Vehicles with stiffer suspension and uneven roads also factors in.


I personally feel the “HID Kit” makers/resellers are more to blame. some of the ads are downright fraudulent with their claims, though I doubt a newcomer would notice such discrepancies.

As for the difference in optics with the two light sources, it has to deal with optical design. You can take two almost identical looking projectors (one for HID and one for halogen) though each will project a different beam pattern. The same can also be said for two identical HID projectors but with different regulatory standards (ECE vs. DOT for example). Each would disperse according to their optical design based on their regulations even though their outward appearence was identical.

Most do not look deep enough to realize this. Like you already mentioned, they see something that looks alike and automatically assume it’s the same.

popalock85

Wow......I got sick of reading after the 8th post.
I've never seen so much interest in educating people about lighting.


I honestly don't understand how you guys have the time to write a thesis everytime you have something to say.

I think the moderator should rename this post......
Projector Light Battle "The Book"
Author: hidretro.com, TorneoDude, Soon2BxB.

Audicted

it's great stuff, when you have insomniac =)

But really, I learned a lot, and I am a fan of projectors, too.

aireck

seriously..... i just skimped through to seee the pix..lol

squarepants

please people do yourself a favor don't get those crappy projector headlights the stock lights is way better if you do a lot of night driving,i had some and had to take em off the lights don't even light up the road like the stock lights just wasted my money and time oh well sh*t happens..