New headlamp bulb tests

Check the voltage at the lamps under load. In other words, don't pull
the socket off the lamp and check the voltage without the bulb. Leave
the lamp plugged in and burning and probe the back of the socket where
the wires go in with a long probe (or thin stiff wire like a
straightened paper clip) to get an under load reading. If its under
about 13 volts (engine running) then its time for relays or other wiring
upgrades.

 

Probably because I can't see ANYTHING reflecting more than 200 of so
feet away they are so dim.

 

200 feet is typical seeing range for properly aimed US low beams.

DS

 

Actually, I use these in my house. 75W commercial use bulbs
that put out ~60 watts equivalent. The bonus? Softer light - sort
of like a frosted bulb out of the clear one and a 15,000 hour life.

But for cars? Not only does undervoltage lessen the light dramatically,
but it also makes the light look dingy and yellow.

If it goes through a bunch of switches and DRL boxes and nonsense,
wiring directly via a relay is going to be a huge difference. Worth
looking into.

Actually, the opposite occurs. I ran my lights an hour ago. 11.5V
on lowbeams. Ack. Lower wattage lights are more prone to color-shifting
and low output as the filament doesn't have much leeway between proper
operation and glowing a bit. Take a dimmer in your house(most have one
somewhere) - and see how the lights go on in a non-linear fashion. The
first 1/4 of the way on barely gets the filament to glow amber like a
lightbulb and the last 1/4 accounts for nearly half of the light.

In home lighting, for instance, nothing much at ALL happens at 50-80V.
Just incredibly dim light. Cars are the same way. A light will barely
burn at 9-10V out of ~13.5 expected. Smaller bulbs have less leeway
to play with before they stop working properly.

Mine tested somewhere in the middle which means my lowbeams are
operating at roughly half power after I factor in 10-15% loss from
older assemblies.

Try this:
Get some good 12-gauge wire. Run it direcly to the light on one side
(carefully, so not to shock yourself) - after disconnecting the old
feed. The simple way, IMO, is a visit to a junkyard and pull the
connector and about 6 inches of wire off. Strip, apply some Scotch-loks,
and instant tester. Car obviously on.

You should see a huge difference. I did on my 240 and promptly located
the parts to fix it.

 

FWIW I use a Sunpro CP7678 (kinda like this one...the model numbers match
but they look different...mine's kinda old maybe that's why) and like it a
lot:

http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=2530131191

It can test all sorts of stuff. Voltage, resistance, tach, etc.

 

Q: does 10.5-11 count? Think I found my problem. Now where do I
get the relays?

 

Dan Stern or many other places. Google the words "relay harness" and "9007"
(like if your bulbs were 9007 bulbs) and a boatload of URLs should come up.

Or you can make your own. Get two 30-amp fused relays with a 10 amp fuse
each, 10 or 12 gauge wire (10 preferred but don't go narrower than 12), and
a bunch of connectors and go from there.

However if you buy a pre-made harness you probably want to decide now if you
want to convert to e-codes or not since the bulb sockets will be different
and therefore the harnesses will be different (no sense in buying a 9007
harness now only to hack up up later to fit H4s when you can buy a H4
harness from the get-go).

 

Ops. my bad. 11.5 maybe 12.(somehow got the numbers off by one)

Still, way too low. Thankfully, my car has no DRLs - just a 3-way
pull/knob, so it should be simple.

 

Buy from me or from someone else, but be choosy -- the commonly available
9007 relay harness (the one with the bright yellow or blue sleeve around
the wires) is a piece of third-world trash. Power wires need to be 12 or
10 gauge!

DS

 

The Lucas you are talking about, whose reputation extends well back into
the 50s, went to corporate heaven long ago. They were first taken over by
the reformed Massey Ferguson - can't remember the oddball name they used -
and that was ultimately carved up and some of the Lucas part taken over by
TRW. I hear they use the Lucas brand name for many of their aircraft
electronic parts... just so you'll have a nice warm feeling the next time
you fly.;-)

Rgds, George Macdonald

"Just because they're paranoid doesn't mean you're not psychotic" - Who, me??

 

At 60 mph, this appears to give you 0.8 sec to figure out that what
you see coming at you is a problem.

Assuming you are not looking at your speedo or similar when it
first becomes visible.

Leon

 

Yep. We all overdrive our low beams -- on BOTH sides of the pond. This is
the inherent contradiction in low-beam lighting, which by today's
definition has a geometrically-limited seeing range that cannot be
increased without causing unacceptable glare.

The problem is attacked differently in North America vs. Europe.

In North America, all headlamps are aimed the same, whether they're 18
inches or 40 inches off the ground. This means high-mount headlamps have a
seeing advantage and produce a shitload of glare for everyone, while
low-mount headlamps have a seeing disadvantage. There's no cutoff, so the
driver's seeing range ends...kinda sorta somewhere out there someplace.
Low beam cutoffs are regarded as icky Yurrupeen stupidity that limit
seeing distance.

In Europe, a specific "preview" of 85 m (varies by country, but 75-90 m is
common) is defined. Headlamps must be nominally aimed to achieve a seeing
distance of 85 m. That means headlamps mounted higher are aimed lower, and
headlamps mounted lower are aimed higher. Everyone has pretty much the
same seeing distance, and the cutoff in the low beam probably provides the
driver with a clear visual cue that says "You can see THIS FAR ONLY,
anything beyond this range you will not stop for." The cue is
real-time...seeing distance is shorter on a left-hand curve and longer on
a right-hand curve (in a traffic-on-right country), shorter going down a
hill, longer going up a hill, etc.

I know which system I think is more sensible.

It hasn't yet been studied with much rigor, but the notion of low beam
cutoff as useful visual cue rather than icky yurrupeen stupidity dropped
some jaws and got some pens scratching on notepads when I discussed it at
the NAS Transportation Research Board Visibility Committee roundtable on
headlamp performance and glare last January.

DS

 

My 200 ft I mean - not visible or seeing range, but NOTHING at
all out that far. They barely make it 100 ft. So, a re-wire and
maybe a H4 Euro essembly is in order.

You sell them - how much would a kit for the current bulbs be
with 9007 and H4 connectors(so I can swap later)?

 

Cheers for that - I'd forgotten about most of the light
from the bulb going "backwards" to the reflector and
then out...

Al

 

Always wonder about that. It may sound good in a sale brochure, but those
two (or four) lamps are nothing compare to the big gapping hole that feeds
the radiator. I think it has more to do with aesthetics. If it looks
aerodynamic, it might be aerodynamic...

 

Without the big gaping hole feeding the radiator, you won't need lights.
And if the air flows through the radiator effectively, it doesn't
restrict too much. Look at the big gapping holes on an F1 car, to cool
the engine, to cool the brakes etc, but they still make those tiny
little mirrors as aerodynamic as possible.

It is all about give and take, lighter is better for fuel mileage so we
make everything we can out of plastic. We haven't yet made an engine
that keeps running out of plastic so we have to use some sort of metal.
A steel bumper cover weights nothing compared to a V8, I don't care
what it is made of, but we use a plastic bumper cover because we can and
it saves us a few pounds.


Dan

 

Indeed, the first car that had plastic headlights and the crappy 9004
bulbs was the '84 Lincoln Mark VII. Automotive lighting engineers refer
to these as the first of the Aero-horrors. Not to be outdone, they
(Lincoln/Sylvania) actually made the headlights even WORSE on the '93
Lincoln Mark VIII, to the point of actually being dangerous to drive
behind at night, even in town.

 

Both of you did not get it, shame on you. Proliferation of proper
posting techniques is marginal at best. Take a look back at the history
of this thread. Therein lies your answer.

- D.

 

As a friend of mine says: "!irritating it's - post top don't Please"
Al

 

Everyone knows references FOLLOW the text!