HID lights, Anyone actually using them?

[JAFO]

I searched the forum and read a lot of threads and the few debates but did not see where anyone actually installed them.

Is anyone using them? Am I right in believing the RVF has the H4/9003/HB2 bulb assy?

I am here in Thailand and the roads are poorly lit and after living in the US and having a moto with them they are by far the best for overall visibility and assessing the horizon on dark roads.

Thanks in advance

[BillingCBR]

Ask Leopard Pagan, she resides in the CBR section, but uses them AFAIK and said they made a big difference

[JAFO]

Thanks

[Neosophist]

In the UK they'll be an MOT fail from 1-jan-2012 (thank god finally!)

There are to be some changes to the MOT test from 1st January 2012 which are being introduced in response to European Commission Directive 2010/48/EU of the 5th July 2010 and which will effect those with aftermarket HID headlights and remapped ECUs:

4.1.4 Compliance with requirements:
(a) Lamp, emitted colour, position or intensity not in accordance with the requirements
(b) Products on lens or light source which obviously reduce light intensity or change emitted colour
© Light source and lamp not compatible

4.1.5. Levelling devices (where mandatory):
(a) Device not operating.
(b) Manual device cannot be operated from driver’s seat.

4.1.6 Headlamp cleaning device (where mandatory):
Device not operating.

For anyone with a remap, section 6.1.9 may be relevant.

6.1.9 Engine performance:
(a) Control unit illegal modified.
(b) Illegal engine modification.

(by 'illegal', it is assumed that they mean changed/programmed differently from OEM specifications)

There will also be a new check on the general condition of the wiring:

4.11. Electrical wiring
(a) Wiring insecure or not adequately secured.
(b) Wiring deteriorated.
© Damaged or deteriorated insulation

and on the function of airbag and seat belt pre-tensioner systems:

7.1.4. Safety belt Pre-tensioners:
Pre-tensioner obviously missing or not suitable with the vehicle.

7.1.5. Airbag:
(a) Airbags obviously missing or not suitable with the vehicle.
(b) Airbag obviously non-operative.

7.1.6. SRS Systems:
SRS MIL indicates any kind of failure of the system.

Originally Posted by VOSA
The car/light goods vehicle MOT test is about to change – the European Commission has changed the Directive that covers it. We take a look at when these changes are likely to come into effect and what they mean for MOT testers.
Britain has been testing vehicles under the MOT scheme for 50 years now. Last year, the European Directive covering the MOT test was updated and revised by a modern version called 2009/40/ EC. This was then updated by 2010/48/EU, which was ratified on 5 July this year.
The new Directive keeps the EU minimum 4-2-2 test frequency but adds a number of new elements to the British MOT test. The Directive anticipates all test changes being in place by 1 January 2012, and a common European approach to test certificates in place by 1 January 2014. So what is VOSA doing to introduce the changes?
In terms of test frequency, in mid-July the coalition government confirmed that it intends ‘to look at the issue of MOT test frequencies later this year’. VOSA contributed statistical data to inform the last review in 2008, and we expect that our computer system and the data you have entered will be utilised again in much the same way.
We expect to hear more details of the government’s review proposals later in the year.
As far as changes to the test content are concerned, VOSA has already been analysing the requirements of the new Directive and working out how to implement them. We started this earlier in the year by talking with representatives of the MOT trade at our regular Trade User Group and VTS Council meetings. Both VOSA and the Department for Transport (DfT) are keen to ensure that any changes to the test are introduced in as practical a way as possible, keeping the burden on the trade to a minimum and ideally keeping the changes cost neutral.
In many cases, the changes shouldn’t necessarily lead to an increase in average test times. A good example is the malfunction indicator lamps on the dashboard that indicate defective electronic power steering, electronic stability control and secondary restraint systems. Testers already check the dashboard for other lamps, so no extra time would be required for this addition to the test.
Electrical wiring and batteries are now included in the test’s scope, but testers already check the vehicle structure where wiring is secured – often along the same routes as other testable items, such as brake pipes in the engine compartment. So again, this doesn’t look like an additional burden on the tester. In the pre-computerisation days, testers often (wrongly) failed vehicles for insecure batteries, so they must have been looking at them then! Now, it means that when we implement the new Directive, vehicles can legitimately fail for battery insecurity, for no extra tester effort.
Other items – such as headlamp bulb and unit incompatibility, headlamp levelling devices and illegal engine ‘chipping’ – will need further thought before we can get a workable solution for MOT stations.
Some of the new items may require extra effort on the part of the tester – when we know for sure what that is we’ll be talking again with our trade and DfT colleagues to work out what the impact will be.
The common EU test certificate should be relatively easy to achieve – the only data that the Directive expects and that we don’t currently provide is the symbol for the vehicle’s country of origin. Probably 99% of vehicles tested will have
‘UK’ entered here, but if you do test vehicles with a foreign plate, you will need to enter the correct country symbol. We may even be able to make this change earlier if there is a convenient opportunity.
The MOT trade can rest assured that VOSA is working closely with you to introduce any new elements as efficiently and effectively as possible, with the minimum of fuss. Just as importantly, we are also working closely with Siemens to ensure that any system changes due on New Year’s Eve 2011 go smoothly! We should know more by the time the MOT seminars take place – come along and ask the experts.

It's still technically a 'grey' area in the UK as there illegal under UK law but permitted (providing certain critera are met) under European law.

Anyhow.. the reason they arn't allowed is that a HID bulb burns radically different to a standard filament bulb, this requires a different kind of housing for the lamp as the light doesn't focus better.

Many people say 'i've focussed mine and it doesn't blind other drivers now so it's ok!'

WRONG.

Infact most of these kits contain a modified HID bulb mounted to a standard bulb holder which fits into the wrong lens... not only does this produce a crap beam.. it often lights up the immediate road infront of you, akin to driving a car with foglamps on... while this might look great initially, seeing the immediate road is bad as your eyes adjust to the short distance and objects from afar arn't spotted as quickly.

This is just dangerous, especially on a bike!

The second type of 'kit' you can buy incorpates a new projector housing, these require you to cut up your existing light and mount the lens in, providing you do a good job you can get a good focussed beam that shines light into the correct place! While it's not technically legal in the UK and will be an MOT fail soon it's the only way to get a safe beam, i'd recommend this if your determined to go HID, in Thailand it might not be picked up so much.

HID 'existing lens' kit




An example of a 'KIT', these use a hacked HID bulb mounted to an existing bulb fitment, better off setting fire to your money than buying this kind of kit.

Projecter lens kit



Notice in this kit the bulbs are not 'hacked' but instead come with their own reflector housing that focus' the beam correctly. Your existing light needs to be modified to accomodate this housing (cut the back out of it and silicone it in)



This is what happens when you use a normal parabolic mirror reflector housing with a HID bulb, the HID bulb burns hotter in a different place and the light is created by an ARC not a tungsten fillament, which is why manufactureres HAD to re-design the housing to suit.

I've yet to see anyone show me a suitable example of an HID conversion that didn't involve using a dedicated projector housing, mainly becuase regardless of what people claim (especially sellers of said kits) it is impossible with the wrong type of projector, after explaining to proud motorbiker that their improvement is seeing more of the foreground and being less likely to spot the deer up ahead at night they pipe down a bit.

So in conclusion, if your going to convert use a projector housing. I've helped people build light units with projectors and they have produced good results! Not so good if you find out they'll be an MOT fail in 6 months.. but in Thailand you can get away with it!

IF not get some bright H4's.. you can get 100/60watt or even higher spec 'rally bulbs'

Good read, especially for UK owners.

http://www.mgf.ultimatemg.com/group2/li ... /index.htm

Conclusions

HIDs are not technically legal as a retrofit, but they will currently pass an MoT inspection. There are definite advantages with respect to light power and lower heat generation, but getting a good light beam pattern may require the use of a dedicated projector unit, pushing up both cost and difficulty of the installation. After having given the topic a great deal of thought, I have not gone down this route. But then I live in a city with widespread street lighting, so the performance of the dipped beam is rather less important than if I lived in the countryside. Whether you should fit these bulbs has to be your decision, but my opinion is to edge against it.

[JAFO]

Hello and thanks for the response. I had searched forum and found your thread. For me, I do not live in the UK so the laws do not apply to me. I live in Thailand.

I really want to know if anybody has bought a kit and installed and anything that I might or should be aware of.

As for HID lights, Almost all auto's in US are HID now as are the new motorcycles. I have had cars and a motorcycle with both "White" lights and HID. Honestly there is simply no comparison for both visibility and road safety.

[Neosophist]

I take it you didn't bother to read my post properly. I'm aware your in Thailand, I included the back-story and UK bits becuase there are a lot of UK members and it is nice to understand what a proper 'kit' is and why it can work, even though in the UK it will be MOT fail soon.

I'll quote the bits of it that apply specifically to you.

So in conclusion, if your going to convert use a projector housing. I've helped people build light units with projectors and they have produced good results! Not so good if you find out they'll be an MOT fail in 6 months.. but in Thailand you can get away with it!

IF not get some bright H4's.. you can get 100/60watt or even higher spec 'rally bulbs'

Conclusions

HIDs are not technically legal as a retrofit, but they will currently pass an MoT inspection. There are definite advantages with respect to light power and lower heat generation, but getting a good light beam pattern may require the use of a dedicated projector unit, pushing up both cost and difficulty of the installation. After having given the topic a great deal of thought, I have not gone down this route. But then I live in a city with widespread street lighting, so the performance of the dipped beam is rather less important than if I lived in the countryside. Whether you should fit these bulbs has to be your decision, but my opinion is to edge against it.

If you re-read it you'll find I already wrote that

If you want to ask any specific qutestions about build kits using projectors vs 'bulb' hacks go right ahead. You'll find that I already said a proper HID kit does have advantages in terms of light and heat.

A 'bulb-hack' kit is akin to a death-kit though. And you can see by my post i'm obviously going to advocate using a proper projector kit.

[JAFO]

Cool man and Thanks..... Really. I hope I did not rub ya the wrong way. I know posting in forums can be left to a lot of interpretation. I read your post but saw all the MOT info. I did not want to hijack the original thread as it was 4 pages deep with excellent info for those where laws are a critical part of the decision making process.

With that said, Here is a link to the kits I am researching. These are general. I have my friend in US looking into them through his shop as well.

http://www.delonixradar.com.au/hid-xeno ... /h4-hi-lo/

I am concerned about beam alignment. When I added HID's to my 69 Chevrolet Camaro I had infinite housing adjustments. I went to the back of a big building and aligned them out on the wall to a target I made with tape. Was easy and took about 30 minutes with a friend. A motorcycle with bulbs so close can present a problem.

Again many many thanks. Your read was very detailed and quite accurate.

[Neosophist]

It's cool, my last post was a bit long but I like to be comprehensive.

I'm really really against those Hx kits.. They're the 'hack a HID bulb to fit into an Hx mount.'

If there was any way of doing this properly the manufacturers wouldnt' have spent so much time and money designing a new reflector housing.

Even if you goto a dark place and sort the kit by adjusting the parabolic lense (standard Hx reflector) so that you dont' dazzle the shite out ever other driver the problem is this..

Light Intensity

The most dangerous part of the attempt to "retrofit" Xenon headlamps is that sometimes you get a deceptive and illusory "improvement" in the performance of the headlamp. The performance of the headlamp is perceived to be "better" because of the much higher level of foreground lighting (on the road immediately in front of the car). However, examining isoscans of
the beam patterns produced by this kind of "conversion" reveals *less* distance light, and often an alarming relative minimum where there's meant to be a relative maximum in light intensity. When you *think* you can see better than you can, you're *not* safe.

It's tricky to judge headlamp beam performance without a lot of knowledge, a lot of training and a lot of special equipment, because subjective perceptions are very misleading. Having a lot of strong light in the foreground, that is on the road close to the car and out to the sides, is very comforting and reliably produces a strong *impression* of "good headlights". The problem is that not only is foreground lighting of decidedly secondary importance when travelling much above 30 mph, but having a very strong pool of light close to the car causes your pupils to close down, *worsening* your distance vision...all the while giving you
this false sense of security. This is to say nothing of the massive
amounts of glare to other road users and backdazzle to you, the driver, that results from these "retrofits".

It is really hard to explain to people who won't buy it, but hopefully this gets the message across.

Becuase your eyes have an illuminated foreground, furhter excasorbated by aiming a 'Hx kit' downward to redue dazzle to other drivers and sort out beam alignment you have less light in the distance where it is needed and your pupils close up due to the light making it harder to see in the distance.

This compounded issue is why I call fitting these to a motorbike a 'death-kit' and part of the reason why goverments are making legislature changes to make them illegal.

It really does fuck up your long distance vision and when on a bike this is really important, travelling a night and miss a car, truck or even a pedestrian and your goign for a nasty spill!

Being made to feel over-confident with actually WORSE vision is a recepie for disastor.

A Proper projector kit is the ONLY way to fix this.

The following bulbs are totally illegal for road use, there standard H4's... but as there 90w dipped / 130 watt main... (thats over twice the wattage of a standard H4 on high and 50% brighter on dipped!!)

http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/Ring-Rally-Sport- ... 2eb3a325d3

However, these will produce a correct beam pattern in your lenses and shine light where you need it!

I'd advoate these any-day over a dodgy death-kit. (plus they are cheaper!)

[Morespeedvicar]

Not that i've got a rally lamp in my nc30 at all, but they do work great and the beam on the mot tester thingy is spot on. But please do the relay mod first as they draw rather alot of current on high beam. I've only got one head lamp on my bike, so looked into HID but when i came to it i'd rather spend 15 quid on a rally lamp than 60 quid on a hid kit. Its been in three year and is still mega bright, or it would be if i had one fitted which i havent officer!
Cheers
Ian

[JAFO]

Thanks for the reply. So I have a few more technical questions for comparison purposes.

What happens to the housing after using the Rally lights? They do run extremely hot.

Based on generator stats running 2 of them is going to tax the electrical system, so this would require a generator upgrade?

If you run HID, you have a brighter light, operating temp is quite a bit less and based on kit stats you draw far less power.

In the end the H4 Rally light is far cheaper(on the surface) but what else do you have to give to run them consistently. Electrical upgrades could include Relays and a Generator.