FR-S Headlight Reflector Blackout

[Cheddar]

Nice job! But I would have left the high beam reflector chrome on the inside.

You actually have no high beams lol

[n2oinferno]

Originally Posted by dsgerbc

Please post the _bottom_ cut-off of your light pattern. Then compare to BRZ. I bet the glare (esp. in the wet) from lack of proper bottom cut-off from your HIDs is dreadful.

Can you post an example? You're the first person I've ever seen mention bottom cutoff, and I've spent a decent amount of time lurking candlepower and other lighting forums. As far as I know, the cutoff shield in a projector housing only limits the top of where the beam cuts off, hence "cutoff," and the lower portion of the beam is determined by the shape of the projector lens, distance to focal point, etc..

Are you getting hotspotting confused with cutoff, where it creates bright patches in the beam of light because of an incorrect focal point, which can cause glare directly on the road an increase eye-strain?

[dsgerbc]

I don't mean bottom cut-off literally. Basically all I'm saying is that to claim "I don't blind oncoming traffic" requires a lot more than just looking at the top cut-off line.

That said - just compare the light pattern above to OEM BRZ HIDs. The latter looks like it has both cut-off shields, since the light pattern has pretty much two parallel cut-offs.

[DarrenDriven]

I literally just got back from properly aiming my lights, which ended with walking about a half-block away and sighting the car as if I was oncoming traffic. There is ZERO glare until I layed down on the ground and only then did it look bright. I'm good to go on low-beams. It looks just like the HIDs in my old S2000 now, which were the best headlights that I ever had!

Originally Posted by dsgerbc

...to claim "I don't blind oncoming traffic" requires a lot more than just looking at the top cut-off line.

I have never heard of a bottom-cutoff and it doesn't make much sense to me. My upper cut-off is a very clean line with almost zero light above the cut-off. dsgerbc, can you please explain how a properly aimed low-beam light with a sharp but-off could possibly blind oncoming drivers? You claim that it requires A LOT MORE than just looking at the top cutoff. Really? I'd like to hear how much more it takes, haha.

[DarrenDriven]

Originally Posted by MmmHamSandwich

It's true. Those stickers that negatively impact drivability and safety are a doozy. We need laws against that sort of thing.

Haha... 20 years ago I had a silver Jetta GLi on which I slapped a giant green NEUSPEED sticker across the top (half?) of the windshield. After scraping ice off of my window one winter day I realized that I accidentally removed the U, so I took some extra bits off to change the sticker to say "I SPEED". Cop ticketed me the next day for obstruction of view. $100. I am ashamed on many levels, but probably the most for putting a green sticker on a silver car. Sheesh.

[frs]

looks great! what hid brand are you using? what wattage are they?

[dsgerbc]

Originally Posted by DarrenDriven

haha.

You are aware that DOT has specs for the whole distribution of the light pattern, right?

You substituted a light source with one even bright area to the one with two super-bright hot-spots and expect optics designed for the former to work?
You top cut-off might be visually acceptable (even though it probably still fails DOT specs), your bottom light distribution most definitely sucks, with likely 10x more light in the foregroud which:
a) will blind oncoming traffic when the road is wet (through reflection off the ground)
b) will compromise your own longer-distance vision through too-much lighting near, not letting the eye work out what's 100ft ahead.

So, to sum-up, you compromised your own safety and the safety of others.

But go on, continue to delude yourself. I'm sure you'll 100 more 'thanks' from a bunch more members who don't know better.

[DarrenDriven]

Originally Posted by frs

looks great! what hid brand are you using? what wattage are they?

I went with 55w HIDs from hidextra.com in 5000k H11 bulbs for the low beams. I did have to wire in a relay as only one bulb would fire due to excessive voltage draw when they were turned on simultaneously.

Originally Posted by dsgerbc

But go on, continue to delude yourself. I'm sure you'll 100 more 'thanks' from a bunch more members who don't know better.

You are arguing for the sake of argument, but that's cool. I'm not disagreeing with your overall premise, but since you don't actually have an FR-S with HIDs in it (what DO you drive anyway?) then your entire objection to MY conversion is based on a guess and no solid evidence.

Most cars that I see with HID conversions have horrible light distribution and actually make night visibility worse than stock. Adding HIDs to the FR-S was an experiment and I am pleasantly surprised that the light pattern is great and the intensity spread is even.

I would be happy to take some more photos or video of my lights to better illuminate this topic. Of course, if I just posted a bunch of photos and video you would probably still pick it apart, so since you appear to be the expert I would happily take any photos or video that you request so that we can actually get to the bottom of this... even if I am wrong.

I am thinking that we do some comparisons with a BRZ and an S2000 (which has great stock lighting) to determine if the HID-converted FR-S has a similar light spread, brightness and cutoff -- but you are the expert, so lay out the best way to settle this and I will get right on it.

[dsgerbc]

Originally Posted by DarrenDriven

is based on a guess and no solid evidence.

Nope, it's based on simple physics/optics. There is zero chance optics designed to comply with DOT specs with one type of light source would produce DOT-compliant light pattern with HID implants.

If you want to claim that you're not blinding oncoming traffic - you need to ditch this set-up and go for proper LHD GT86 HIDs.

I have no problem with people saying "screw the oncoming traffic, I'm doing the retrofit of HIDs". It's their car and they'll get the ticket when the cops start cracking down on it (there are hundreds of complaints about these transplants at NTHSA and they will tighten and start enforcing the rules on these sooner or later). I only responded since you claim not to be blinding the other drivers. I'm fairly certain that you are, in the rain.

[DarrenDriven]

Originally Posted by dsgerbc

Nope, it's based on simple physics/optics. There is zero chance optics designed to comply with DOT specs with one type of light source would produce DOT-compliant light pattern with HID implants

This is based on which facts? Go ahead and lay out the DOT specs and we can dissect them. If the gas pocket of an HID bulb HAPPENED to fall exactly into the same physical location of the filament of the halogen bulb then the optics of the reflector/projector would reflect light in exactly the same pattern. The only difference would be the intensity/color of the light, right? Well, it is true that my 55w HIDs are much brighter than the stock halogen bulbs, but does that automatically mean that they are non-compliant with DOT specs? Many factory HIDs out there are very bright as well and are DOT compliant. I strongly disagree with your zero chance claim. Small chance, yes, but not zero. I'm not sure if my lights are DOT-spec compliant (obviously ignoring the fact that one spec is surely that they have been verified by DOT) but I would be very interested to find out if they do meet the criteria.

I'm not really interested in an instrumented test of my lights with expensive equipment that I don't have, so in this case it seems that a comparison with the BRZ and S2000 would be a sufficient replacement test. I expected you to ignore my challenge and I am amazed that you are still arguing even though I asked you to help me plan out a way to fairly compare the three set of lights. That only further proves to me that you just want to argue for the sake of argument.

Originally Posted by dsgerbc

If you want to claim that you're not blinding oncoming traffic - you need to ditch this set-up and go for proper LHD GT86 HIDs.

Why? Again, we haven't proved that my lights are good or bad yet and you are already saying that I can't even CLAIM that I am not blinding oncoming traffic without having to spend thousands of dollars? You are kidding, right?

Damn, did I fall for this again!?!
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Troll_%28Internet%29

What kind of car did you say you drove? Hmmm... you ignored that, too.

[robotvoice]

Originally Posted by DarrenDriven

This is based on which facts? Go ahead and lay out the DOT specs and we can dissect them. If the gas pocket of an HID bulb HAPPENED to fall exactly into the same physical location of the filament of the halogen bulb then the optics of the reflector/projector would reflect light in exactly the same pattern. The only difference would be the intensity/color of the light, right? Well, it is true that my 55w HIDs are much brighter than the stock halogen bulbs, but does that automatically mean that they are non-compliant with DOT specs? Many factory HIDs out there are very bright as well and are DOT compliant. I strongly disagree with your zero chance claim. Small chance, yes, but not zero. I'm not sure if my lights are DOT-spec compliant (obviously ignoring the fact that one spec is surely that they have been verified by DOT) but I would be very interested to find out if they do meet the criteria.

I'm not really interested in an instrumented test of my lights with expensive equipment that I don't have, so in this case it seems that a comparison with the BRZ and S2000 would be a sufficient replacement test. I expected you to ignore my challenge and I am amazed that you are still arguing even though I asked you to help me plan out a way to fairly compare the three set of lights. That only further proves to me that you just want to argue for the sake of argument.



Why? Again, we haven't proved that my lights are good or bad yet and you are already saying that I can't even CLAIM that I am not blinding oncoming traffic without having to spend thousands of dollars? You are kidding, right?

Damn, did I fall for this again!?!
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Troll_%28Internet%29

What kind of car did you say you drove? Hmmm... you ignored that, too.

You do realize the light emitted from an arc of an HID capsule and from the filament of a halogen bulb are completely different, right? It's funny reading through your posts, you're basically just spewing out the pseudo "tech info" that cheap ricer kit sites post to make you feel better about wasting your money on a kit. You're clearly ignoring the entire physical aspect of why HID kits don't work in halogen headlights in the first place. Your cutoff looks like garbage and it's giving off a pretty unsafe amount of glare. You can't argue that at all.

[DarrenDriven]

I'm gonna get some photos of the BRZ, S2000 and my car together... hopefully tonight. We can argue about it all we want, but until there is concrete evidence what is the point?

I do believe that my lights will be CLOSE to the other two stock setups, but if I am wrong then I will post that as well. I think that in a projector the HID conversion can replicate a factory setup, while in most other applications it cannot.

[robotvoice]

I'm curious, what "evidence" are you looking for? Here is your cutoff:



Here is the cutoff from the first gen clear lens S2000 projector:



Your cutoff is garbage compared to a true HID projector. There's no arguing that. The evidence is right there.

The bowl of a halogen projector has different dimensions and focuses light differently than a true HID projector. The cutoff shield of a halogen projector has a special flap built into it (some refer to this as the "squirrel finder shield") to produce some glare to help illuminate roads signs. HID projectors do not have this extra piece in their cutoff. All these factors contribute to piss poor light output (uneven cutoff, excessive amounts of glare above cutoff, hotspotting and unevenness in the beam pattern below the cutoff) which you have shared and confirmed.

[Double4Free]