High Powered Headlight Globes

[Falchoon]

  Trumpy said:

Absolute bas*ard of a job to change them, every knuckle lost a bit of skin that day.

Sure is!

OK, I lashed out and bought new globes, however not any of the ones recommended by anyone here, simply because these weren't available at Super Cheap or Autobarn.

I bought Narva Plus 30 (p/n 48878BL2) H4 12V 60/55W P43t at ~$22.00 pr.

I only replaced the one that was blown at this stage, in the side behind the airbox. That was a big enough job. The other side looks like the battery might have to come out so I might actually leave that for now and get it done when the car gets its 20,000km service.

I haven't driven at night yet so I can't tell if there's any noticeable difference in light output. It looks the same shining on the garage door, so I guess I'll see (so to speak! :lol: )

[profrat]

Thanks Turbo6man. I agree, spots at low altitude have their limitations. Might have to look at a way to fit proper aux lights higher up whan I get my machine.

But...... can anyone confirm that the light housing will actually melt or change shape if 100w globes are used. I have used 90/100 's in another brand of car for the past 10 years. This (nameless 6 cyl turbo) car had plastic housings but glass lenses. Not the slightest sign of damage. I would have thought the vulnerable part was the plastic lens, not the housing.

cheers, Profrat

[Turbo6man]

profat> I don't think the BAs have been around long enough for anyone to know. Certainly with EF, EL the whole light reflector and lens, everybloodything would meltdown if you used high power globes and did long stints with them on. The BA lens, like the AU, is quite large and therefore has a much greater cooling area to help dissipate the heat developed by high power globes.

Basically I find that the low beams are OK if they are adjusted properly. I am a firm believer in low beams NOT being glarey to oncoming drivers and therefore would NEVER put high power globes in.

On the other hand the high beams leave a lot to be desired as far as light control is concerned - they are powerful but badly controlled resulting in lots of shadows and "hot spots" on the road. Even high power globes won't fix this. The only answer is for auxilliary lights. And, if you are going to have driving lights then why bother upgrading the normal headlights as they will be over-ridden anyway???

I do a helluva lot of night driving, probably around 20,000km every year, maybe even more, so lights are extremely important to me, and over the years I have tested squillions (or maybe more :lol:) of lighting systems so I do know how to guage the best options.

[profrat]

Thanks for the insight (longsight?) Turbo6man. I too travel a large majority of my miles at night on rural roads and I concur as to the value of proper driving lights. I currently run 4(!) aux lights. Two 7' long range pencils and two smaller 5.3/4" driving angled out about 10 degrees for roo spotting and cornering (that can be switched off for long straight roads with little animal hazard). I actually removed the seperate inner high beam globes in the standard headlight housings as they actually made things worse with uncontroled light where it was detrimental. My theory is that if I am unfortunate enough to not see the roos in time, I will just burn them off the road anyhow.

Seems my new XR6T will have to have the same set up, or at least the long range pencils. I will have to start designing a light bar.

I must respectfully disagree about the high powered low beams though. Can you picture what it is like cruzing along with 600 watts of almost daylight , and then have to switch to a couple of feeble 55 watt lows. My experience is that it takes a few dangerous seconds for the eyes to adjust to the near darkness. I concur though, that the lows MUST be adjusted properly and carefully to avoid dazzle to oncoming drivers, especially when towing or with a load of kids and gear in the back. Ideally, I would want 100w lows and 55 watt highs in the main housing. Don't think you can get 'em though. Pity! May be the XR6 Fog lights help the lows enough to not worry about high wattage low beam globes. Any insight into this?

Cheers, Profrat

[profrat]

Ok, I decided to show you what I mean. Please don't flame me 'cause its a Dunnydoor. It was a great 6 cyl turbo. Now I am getting a newer, better one. :D

[Adam]

I find the low and high beam on my ute to be excellent. The high beam doesn't have any gaps, it's a completely even spread.

From my experience I find all these "hi powered" globes to be a waste of money! I bought some Arctic Blue globes and yes the light is whiter but doesn't throw anymore light, and when it was raining you couldn't even tell if they were on or not! Not to mention they don't last long and cost heaps! I switched back to Plus 30's and couldn't be happier.

[profrat]

I read a piece on the internet (so it must be true :lol: ) written by a lighting expert who said that the whiter (blue) lights are WORSE in poor weather conditions. His contention was that the warmer (yellower) lights give better visability in rain and bad weather. My own experiences concur. "Normal" QH globes are better than the blue type. 100w are better still :hiwelcome:

cheers, Proffessor Ratbaggy

[SR-71 Blackbird]

  Turbo6man said:

profat> I don't think the BAs have been around long enough for anyone to know. Certainly with EF, EL the whole light reflector and lens, everybloodything would meltdown if you used high power globes and did long stints with them on. The BA lens, like the AU, is quite large and therefore has a much greater cooling area to help dissipate the heat developed by high power globes.

Basically I find that the low beams are OK if they are adjusted properly. I am a firm believer in low beams NOT being glarey to oncoming drivers and therefore would NEVER put high power globes in.

On the other hand the high beams leave a lot to be desired as far as light control is concerned - they are powerful but badly controlled resulting in lots of shadows and "hot spots" on the road. Even high power globes won't fix this. The only answer is for auxilliary lights. And, if you are going to have driving lights then why bother upgrading the normal headlights as they will be over-ridden anyway???

I do a helluva lot of night driving, probably around 20,000km every year, maybe even more, so lights are extremely important to me, and over the years I have tested squillions (or maybe more :lol:) of lighting systems so I do know how to guage the best options.

For a little clarification the problem that lies with using high wattage bulbs in newer polycarbonate lenses, found in new car eg Ba Falcons, Vy Crumpledoors and Toyota prados. Is that until recently no UV cut bulbs have been available.

At the moment I am pretty sure that all bulbs are now UV cut. Narva range for sure. This did not affect earlier car headlight lenses as they were made of glass. The best bulbs available on the market have to be the Philips range of bulbs apart from the high discharge Xenon systems found on newer GTR Skylines and BMWs. I have seen kits designed to retro fit Xenon lighting to non xenon cars but these are illegal. Cars fitted with xenon lighting require a levelling system as not to blind a driver coming in the opposite direction when on an incline. The Philips bulbs put out more usable light per watt than regular bulbs. If you could see a demonstration of the effectiveness of standard bulbs against these you would be amazed.

True the Diamond visions and blue visions are more pose value but do offer more light. Crystal visions are what most people would find best if after more light without that blue look. One demonstration of a Philips bulb vs. a standard globe is the eyedropper test where a running bulb is subjected to a stream of water from a eyedropper the standard bulb explodes instantly in a rain of glass, the Philips bulbs are unaffected and inhere lies the secret, a different type of glass is used this provides the Philips range with a technical advantage of greater light output and hardier bulb (less effect of blowing when touch by human hands still not recommended) making them the most advanced bulb currently on the market for standard headlights.

As for wattage the printed wattage on the bulb refers to the input power required to run the bulb and in a way a higher wattage bulb will give more light but on the other hand look up Hellas Xenon Predators the flagship spotlight that they provide. They are rated at only 60 watts but outperform virtually any spotlight. They are more efficient. If you intend to upgrade your lighting take this into consideration. Say you upgrade the largest bulb available in the Nava range 2 x 130/90 watts high/low and 2 x 130 watts high a total power consumption of 700watts with the best case scenario of a 14.4 Voltage nominal but usually lower the current draw would be a massive 48.61 Amperes and knowing how manufactures try to make a vehicle cost effective to buy they would not over engineer the power system for lighting to cope with this for long. I have seen this done on previous cars and no problems at first but down the track it could be 2 months, 2 years, or 20 before you have a failure. I hope this helps if you need any more info PM me.

Regards Neill :hiwelcome:

[profrat]

Hi SR71 Blackbird,

Can you elaborate on what you refer to as "UV cut". As I read it I assume you mean that this "UV Cut" helps to prevent lens meltdown with high powered globes. Is this correct?

Ahhhh.... it would be good if someone would actually publish a comparitive test on light globes done in a scientific manner with quantitative measures and controls. I would love to see that. Then we may get some insight into whether these '30% more light' claims have any validity. Having said that I am still sure some brands would be better than others.

To see the difference between a more effecient light for the same wattage as a less effecient light, one only has to compare a 5 3/4" GE 100w aircraft landing light sealed beam with a similar Japanese 100w light made for automotive use. The differnce is night and day (pun intended). The AL light runs MUCH hotter and whiter, BUT it lasts MUCH less time. In aero use thay are only rated for 25 hours of use and then must be replaced. The Auto lights are rated for hundreds of hours. In my (ancient history) rallying days I could not afford Cibie Super Oscars so I used AL Lights. They were really good but I had to replace tham a LOT. (cheap at the airport because they would sell me the 'out of hours' ones for a few dollars and some of them had a lot less than 25 hours on them). When I could finally afford Oscars, I found them an improvement. The globes lasted a LOT longer, but the light out put was not THAT much better. They gave more options though. Spots, Driving or Fogs.

It is always a good idea to upgrade the connectors, wiring and relays when fitting higher watt globes. Also a good idea to make sure you have a good margin of excess amperage to prevent voltage drop. I am currently running 600watts on high beam with a 70 amp alternator and I recon this is on the limit even though the lights only draw around 46 amps.

I would still like to hear from anyone who has actually tried 90/100 globes in a BA Falcon.

Cheers, Profrat

[Blown BA]

If you want good high powered globes go for PHILIPS BLUE VISION had them on my AU and now the BA....bright and a clean light $55 from Autobarn cant go wrong