LED lights on cars. TOO BRIGHT!!!

On 05/02/2013 05:07 PM, dsi1 wrote:
> On 5/1/2013 11:39 PM, wrote:
>>
>> I think the real problem is people fitting LED bulbs to old cars.
>> The incandescent bulb sprays light out over 300 degrees or so, then
>> the reflector redirects it to optimum coverage. The LEDs shoot out
>> a narrow dazzling beam, but from the size, there is a dim ****-weak
>> ember visible in total darkness.
>>
>
> My late Sonata had headlights that cut off the top portion of the beam
> sharply. It looked like a movie picture with the top half of the screen
> cut off. I don't know how they did that but it was neat stuff.

E-codes have been doing that for ages...


--
replace "roosters" with "cox" to reply.
http://members.cox.net/njnagel

On May 2, 5:42*pm, Nate Nagel > wrote:
> On 05/02/2013 05:07 PM, dsi1 wrote:
>
> > On 5/1/2013 11:39 PM, wrote:
>
> >> I think the real problem is people fitting LED bulbs to old cars.
> >> The incandescent bulb sprays light out over 300 degrees or so, then
> >> the reflector redirects it to optimum coverage. The LEDs shoot out
> >> a narrow dazzling beam, but from the size, there is a dim ****-weak
> >> ember visible in total darkness.
>
> > My late Sonata had headlights that cut off the top portion of the beam
> > sharply. It looked like a movie picture with the top half of the screen
> > cut off. I don't know how they did that but it was neat stuff.
>
> E-codes have been doing that for ages...
>
> --
> replace "roosters" with "cox" to reply.http://members.cox.net/njnagel

This was a standard 2006 Sonata with plain old regular headlights. I
have no idea how they got the headlights to cut off like that.

On 05/03/2013 01:03 AM, dsi1 wrote:
> On May 2, 5:42 pm, Nate Nagel > wrote:
>> On 05/02/2013 05:07 PM, dsi1 wrote:
>>
>>> On 5/1/2013 11:39 PM, wrote:
>>
>>>> I think the real problem is people fitting LED bulbs to old cars.
>>>> The incandescent bulb sprays light out over 300 degrees or so, then
>>>> the reflector redirects it to optimum coverage. The LEDs shoot out
>>>> a narrow dazzling beam, but from the size, there is a dim ****-weak
>>>> ember visible in total darkness.
>>
>>> My late Sonata had headlights that cut off the top portion of the beam
>>> sharply. It looked like a movie picture with the top half of the screen
>>> cut off. I don't know how they did that but it was neat stuff.
>>
>> E-codes have been doing that for ages...
>>
>> --
>> replace "roosters" with "cox" to reply.http://members.cox.net/njnagel
>
> This was a standard 2006 Sonata with plain old regular headlights. I
> have no idea how they got the headlights to cut off like that.
>

Seriously it is not that difficult with decent optics; it's a design
decision on the part of the designers of the particular headlamp. The
traditional US/SAE beam pattern (in use since 1939 or thereabouts!) does
not look like that however, so it seems new and exciting to us.

There's a whole discussion that could be had about beam patterns,
bureaucratic history, and other such like but a) I'm not really the
acknowledged expert in this area, more of an advanced hobbyist b) the
one person I "know" personally (I haven't actually met him in person)
who is seems to have left Usenet and c) if you really want to learn more
probably the best place is not here but over at the transportation
lighting section of the candlepower forums (unless there's a better
place I haven't found yet.)

nate

--
replace "roosters" with "cox" to reply.
http://members.cox.net/njnagel

On Thu, 02 May 2013 14:38:32 -0400, "Steve W." >
wrote:

wrote:
>>
>> I think the real problem is people fitting LED bulbs to old cars.
>> The incandescent bulb sprays light out over 300 degrees or so, then
>> the reflector redirects it to optimum coverage. The LEDs shoot out
>> a narrow dazzling beam, but from the size, there is a dim ****-weak
>> ember visible in total darkness.
>
>
>Between the ricers with the "HID conversions" the 12" lifted diesels
>with the "HID look bulbs" and the tech geeks running the LED conversion
>lights (all of which skirt the legal boundaries) it is getting to the
>point I think they should just start making the headlamps permanent
>pieces in the vehicle. That or the inspectors who pass these things out
>to lose their tags and any cop that sees them should be allowed to smash
>the damn things.


I've got a 1960 Dodge with the old quad sealed beams and they are
excellent headlights, better then the specially designed to fit the
body ones on my 92 Explorer, on my 99 GT, the 02 Malibu or any number
of other newer cars I've owned or used. The only ones that are as
good are (surprisingly) the ones in my 09 PT Cruiser. I have very
limited experience with E-code lights but on the occasions I've ridden
with my brother in law in his various 5-series BMW's I've been very
unimpressed with the BMW's supposedly superior headlights. On low
beam they are abysmal to the point of dangerous and on high beam
nothing special compared to the best I've seen on my cars.

On Thu, 02 May 2013 23:42:41 -0400, Nate Nagel >
wrote:

>On 05/02/2013 05:07 PM, dsi1 wrote:
>> On 5/1/2013 11:39 PM, wrote:
>>>
>>> I think the real problem is people fitting LED bulbs to old cars.
>>> The incandescent bulb sprays light out over 300 degrees or so, then
>>> the reflector redirects it to optimum coverage. The LEDs shoot out
>>> a narrow dazzling beam, but from the size, there is a dim ****-weak
>>> ember visible in total darkness.
>>>
>>
>> My late Sonata had headlights that cut off the top portion of the beam
>> sharply. It looked like a movie picture with the top half of the screen
>> cut off. I don't know how they did that but it was neat stuff.
>
>E-codes have been doing that for ages...


And making it very hard to see things up ahead.

On 5/3/2013 6:01 PM, Ashton Crusher wrote:
> On Thu, 02 May 2013 14:38:32 -0400, "Steve W." >
> wrote:
>
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> I think the real problem is people fitting LED bulbs to old cars.
>>> The incandescent bulb sprays light out over 300 degrees or so, then
>>> the reflector redirects it to optimum coverage. The LEDs shoot out
>>> a narrow dazzling beam, but from the size, there is a dim ****-weak
>>> ember visible in total darkness.
>>
>>
>> Between the ricers with the "HID conversions" the 12" lifted diesels
>> with the "HID look bulbs" and the tech geeks running the LED conversion
>> lights (all of which skirt the legal boundaries) it is getting to the
>> point I think they should just start making the headlamps permanent
>> pieces in the vehicle. That or the inspectors who pass these things out
>> to lose their tags and any cop that sees them should be allowed to smash
>> the damn things.
>
>
> I've got a 1960 Dodge with the old quad sealed beams and they are
> excellent headlights, better then the specially designed to fit the
> body ones on my 92 Explorer, on my 99 GT, the 02 Malibu or any number
> of other newer cars I've owned or used. The only ones that are as
> good are (surprisingly) the ones in my 09 PT Cruiser. I have very
> limited experience with E-code lights but on the occasions I've ridden
> with my brother in law in his various 5-series BMW's I've been very
> unimpressed with the BMW's supposedly superior headlights. On low
> beam they are abysmal to the point of dangerous and on high beam
> nothing special compared to the best I've seen on my cars.
>

Well, yeah but when the headlamps on my 1965 Chevys were
new, the big green signs on the Interstate still had
letters, before those fuzzy white stripes.

--
Andrew Muzi
<www.yellowjersey.org/>
Open every day since 1 April, 1971

On 05/03/2013 07:01 PM, Ashton Crusher wrote:
> On Thu, 02 May 2013 14:38:32 -0400, "Steve W." >
> wrote:
>
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> I think the real problem is people fitting LED bulbs to old cars.
>>> The incandescent bulb sprays light out over 300 degrees or so, then
>>> the reflector redirects it to optimum coverage. The LEDs shoot out
>>> a narrow dazzling beam, but from the size, there is a dim ****-weak
>>> ember visible in total darkness.
>>
>>
>> Between the ricers with the "HID conversions" the 12" lifted diesels
>> with the "HID look bulbs" and the tech geeks running the LED conversion
>> lights (all of which skirt the legal boundaries) it is getting to the
>> point I think they should just start making the headlamps permanent
>> pieces in the vehicle. That or the inspectors who pass these things out
>> to lose their tags and any cop that sees them should be allowed to smash
>> the damn things.
>
>
> I've got a 1960 Dodge with the old quad sealed beams and they are
> excellent headlights, better then the specially designed to fit the
> body ones on my 92 Explorer, on my 99 GT, the 02 Malibu or any number
> of other newer cars I've owned or used. The only ones that are as
> good are (surprisingly) the ones in my 09 PT Cruiser. I have very
> limited experience with E-code lights but on the occasions I've ridden
> with my brother in law in his various 5-series BMW's I've been very
> unimpressed with the BMW's supposedly superior headlights. On low
> beam they are abysmal to the point of dangerous and on high beam
> nothing special compared to the best I've seen on my cars.
>

If your '60 still has the original sealed beams they are probably better
quality than anything available (in the same format) today. I made a
similar observation about a low mileage '62 Studebaker I had a few years
back.

I'm surprised that you weren't impressed with the BMW's headlights; I've
yet to drive a Bimmer that didn't have good lights. Unless he modified
it though, they're not E-codes in the US. If it's an E28 5er it
probably had sealed beams! (but modern ones made to much lower quality
standards than the old ones...)

I really like the (US-spec) headlights in my '09 3er, they're actually
impressive to me.

nate

--
replace "roosters" with "cox" to reply.
http://members.cox.net/njnagel

On Fri, 03 May 2013 21:02:13 -0400, Nate Nagel >
wrote:

>On 05/03/2013 07:01 PM, Ashton Crusher wrote:
>> On Thu, 02 May 2013 14:38:32 -0400, "Steve W." >
>> wrote:
>>
>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> I think the real problem is people fitting LED bulbs to old cars.
>>>> The incandescent bulb sprays light out over 300 degrees or so, then
>>>> the reflector redirects it to optimum coverage. The LEDs shoot out
>>>> a narrow dazzling beam, but from the size, there is a dim ****-weak
>>>> ember visible in total darkness.
>>>
>>>
>>> Between the ricers with the "HID conversions" the 12" lifted diesels
>>> with the "HID look bulbs" and the tech geeks running the LED conversion
>>> lights (all of which skirt the legal boundaries) it is getting to the
>>> point I think they should just start making the headlamps permanent
>>> pieces in the vehicle. That or the inspectors who pass these things out
>>> to lose their tags and any cop that sees them should be allowed to smash
>>> the damn things.
>>
>>
>> I've got a 1960 Dodge with the old quad sealed beams and they are
>> excellent headlights, better then the specially designed to fit the
>> body ones on my 92 Explorer, on my 99 GT, the 02 Malibu or any number
>> of other newer cars I've owned or used. The only ones that are as
>> good are (surprisingly) the ones in my 09 PT Cruiser. I have very
>> limited experience with E-code lights but on the occasions I've ridden
>> with my brother in law in his various 5-series BMW's I've been very
>> unimpressed with the BMW's supposedly superior headlights. On low
>> beam they are abysmal to the point of dangerous and on high beam
>> nothing special compared to the best I've seen on my cars.
>>
>
>If your '60 still has the original sealed beams they are probably better
>quality than anything available (in the same format) today. I made a
>similar observation about a low mileage '62 Studebaker I had a few years
>back.
>

They are the newer halogen type.

>I'm surprised that you weren't impressed with the BMW's headlights; I've
>yet to drive a Bimmer that didn't have good lights. Unless he modified
>it though, they're not E-codes in the US. If it's an E28 5er it
>probably had sealed beams! (but modern ones made to much lower quality
>standards than the old ones...)
>

that's a good point. It certainly seems to have teh e-code's very
very sharp cutoff with the right side uptick when it's on low beam. I
don't see how that could qualify under the US standards as it casts so
little upward light you cannot see any of the signs on the road ahead
till you are within 100 feet of them.


>I really like the (US-spec) headlights in my '09 3er, they're actually
>impressive to me.
>
>nate

On 05/03/2013 09:05 PM, Ashton Crusher wrote:
> On Fri, 03 May 2013 21:02:13 -0400, Nate Nagel >
> wrote:
>
>> On 05/03/2013 07:01 PM, Ashton Crusher wrote:
>>> On Thu, 02 May 2013 14:38:32 -0400, "Steve W." >
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> I think the real problem is people fitting LED bulbs to old cars.
>>>>> The incandescent bulb sprays light out over 300 degrees or so, then
>>>>> the reflector redirects it to optimum coverage. The LEDs shoot out
>>>>> a narrow dazzling beam, but from the size, there is a dim ****-weak
>>>>> ember visible in total darkness.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Between the ricers with the "HID conversions" the 12" lifted diesels
>>>> with the "HID look bulbs" and the tech geeks running the LED conversion
>>>> lights (all of which skirt the legal boundaries) it is getting to the
>>>> point I think they should just start making the headlamps permanent
>>>> pieces in the vehicle. That or the inspectors who pass these things out
>>>> to lose their tags and any cop that sees them should be allowed to smash
>>>> the damn things.
>>>
>>>
>>> I've got a 1960 Dodge with the old quad sealed beams and they are
>>> excellent headlights, better then the specially designed to fit the
>>> body ones on my 92 Explorer, on my 99 GT, the 02 Malibu or any number
>>> of other newer cars I've owned or used. The only ones that are as
>>> good are (surprisingly) the ones in my 09 PT Cruiser. I have very
>>> limited experience with E-code lights but on the occasions I've ridden
>>> with my brother in law in his various 5-series BMW's I've been very
>>> unimpressed with the BMW's supposedly superior headlights. On low
>>> beam they are abysmal to the point of dangerous and on high beam
>>> nothing special compared to the best I've seen on my cars.
>>>
>>
>> If your '60 still has the original sealed beams they are probably better
>> quality than anything available (in the same format) today. I made a
>> similar observation about a low mileage '62 Studebaker I had a few years
>> back.
>>
>
> They are the newer halogen type.
>
>> I'm surprised that you weren't impressed with the BMW's headlights; I've
>> yet to drive a Bimmer that didn't have good lights. Unless he modified
>> it though, they're not E-codes in the US. If it's an E28 5er it
>> probably had sealed beams! (but modern ones made to much lower quality
>> standards than the old ones...)
>>
>
> that's a good point. It certainly seems to have teh e-code's very
> very sharp cutoff with the right side uptick when it's on low beam. I
> don't see how that could qualify under the US standards as it casts so
> little upward light you cannot see any of the signs on the road ahead
> till you are within 100 feet of them.

I see people occasionally putting that forward as a complaint about
E-codes but in practice for me that hasn't been an issue. The only
signs I have a problem seeing at night (with any headlights) tend to be
street signs and the E-codes are actually superior IME than old US-spec
sealed beams. But, diff'rent strokes - if you like what you're running
and it's not blinding me, more power to you!

>
>
>> I really like the (US-spec) headlights in my '09 3er, they're actually
>> impressive to me.

To continue my previous comment, those also have a sharp cutoff but the
kickup to the right isn't there... I miss that. BUT they are nice and
bright within the pattern, appear to distribute the light fairly evenly,
and have some cool tech in them... 55W halogen cornering lights are very
nice, and the "adaptive" feature where the HIDs swivel slightly for
curves in the road is actually useful.

I shudder to think what it'll cost if I have to replace anything more
than a bulb or HID burner though...

nate


--
replace "roosters" with "cox" to reply.
http://members.cox.net/njnagel

On Apr 18, 3:04*am, Ashton Crusher > wrote:
> The latest fad on cars is to use LEDs for some of the front lights,
> particularly the DRLs, and use LEDs for brake lights. *Naturally, the
> automakers have to overdo a good thing and have made these LEDs way
> too bright. *Sitting behind someone at night who has their brakes on
> can blind you. *And approaching one of these vehicles with the LED
> DRLS will likewise blind you during the day. *They are as bad or worse
> then the offensive HID systems so faddish.

I wish I had that problem with LED bulbs that half of the apartment is
lighted with.
The lumen ratings even on $20 bulbs are in (high) three digits,
if chineese are to be trusted with that.

But yes, the rear LEDs on cars are way, way too bright.

Maybe once you deter a single alcoholic from rear ending you
you'd appreciate them though.
Must be a selling feature for folks living on a bar lined street.