NHTSA is banning ALL HID "kits"

ChrisK said:
Well, it looks like we are both correct. I finally was able to get the tail light/brake light bulb out. It is indeed a 168 5W bulb in the center of that red cylinder tube.

That definately makes sense Chris, thanks for sharing that information. When I first looked at the lamps up-close in person, I was wondering why they used a red tube to filter the light.. but the quick reaction time of the brake illumination definately showed the use of LED technology. Besides, the red was just TOO pure to be that of a bulb.

We actually created a tail light with a similar design for the Honda Prelude. Since the shape of the tail light is triangular, it was rather difficult to make an LED board to fit the dimensions of that particular housing. We ended up using a bulb for parking lamp function, and a secondary circuit board of LEDs for the brake lamp function.

http://clearcorners.com/products/honda/prelude4/r_full/
 
Re: My HID pics

mikec said:
I also want to make it clear that I'm not trying to start a war with old_S13. If he is working on a DOT approved headlight conversion i'm sure it will be a fine product.

Mike, I appreciate you taking the time to photograph your lights and share these images on the forum, this shows that you arent just trying to prove a point, but doing your best to contribute to the NSX community.

I am completely open to discussing topics and analyzing them over the forum. Afterall, the whole purpose of these forums is to learn, progress, and at the same time.. have fun. The only comment that was a bit upsetting was the one you made about me having an underlying goal, creating this thread to try to generate more business or a new product. But anyway, I did notice how you put more effort into trying to add to this discussion.. rather than make accusations, which is very respectable.

Take care,
- Mike / ClearCorners.Com
 
Re: NSX early JDM HIDs

Correct, and an excellent suggestion. Depending on whats available, the JDM or European HID headlamps would be excellent candidates for true-HID. Its pretty much common work for us to take apart Japanese projector headlamps and modify them to LHD lighting pattern. We work on NISSAN S15 Silvia and Skyline headlamps which are usually RHD. If European HID headlamps are available, that may be a better alternative since the lighting pattern is already LHD.

Changing headlamps shouldnt be that much work.


myf16 said:
In the USA, yes. Japan has had an HID option since 1997. But they drive on the wrong side of the road over there. :)

If somebody could get a JDM HID from 97-01, cut it open and compare it to a JDM halogen light, we could see just how much the designs differ. I believe that in general the higher the quality of the design the less sensitive it will be to precise location and size of the light source.
 
Yea it's getting pretty pathetic. Amazingly enought I never get and harassment from police and I have a 7500K kit in my Civic...go figure.
 
If they are shining in your eyes, they are either poor quality systems, or improperly aimed. Probably both.

In particular, there are certain cars on which JDM front ends have been installed, complete with the RHD aiming pattern...
 
nsxtasy said:
If they are shining in your eyes, they are either poor quality systems, or improperly aimed. Probably both.

True of course, but as cars get old and change hands that invariably becomes more and more common.


In particular, there are certain cars on which JDM front ends have been installed, complete with the RHD aiming pattern...

My disdain for them extends to the factory supplied ones as well. (See above) We were getting along just fine without them.
 
I have many more problems with pickups and SUV's than I can even begin to have with true HID units. Many cars have misalignment problems secondary to accidents or owner intervention without knowledge of correct maintenance.

I am very sensitive to oncoming headlights, and HID has never been more bothersome to me than Halogen. "Driving lights", fog lights, etc, now that is something that should be outlawed.

The NSX has less than desirable low beam extension, and I would love to get better lighting without having to go to higher wattage bulbs, which I know would bother other drivers and possibly damage the electrical system. JMHO.
 
ncdogdoc said:
I have many more problems with pickups and SUV's than I can even begin to have with true HID units.

I agree. I honestly cannot recall ever being blinded or overly annoyed by an HID system. However I almost hate driving my X in the dark because of SUV's that aim their lights directly in my face (head on) or rebounding in my mirrors (from behind). This problem happens to me in not only the really low NSX, but in normal height cars like an Accord as well.

The height difference between trucks/SUV's and cars is currently the one of the biggest auto safety issues facing NHTSA, yet they refuse to do anything about it because of political reasons. Hurting the SUV industry would literally crush the American automakers. (I'm of course referring to what happens when a large SUV and car collide, but this issue of light height seems closely related to me.)

The solution is not that there should be no SUV's or trucks available, but that NHTSA should be working to decrease the number of them on the road such that only those who need them are using them. Right now we have close to 50% car, 50% Truck/SUV in some areas which is about the worst ratio possible safety wise.

NHTSA is a joke. I have lost a lot of respect for them after seeing how they have largely ignored the large SUV problem and instead focused on very minor HID kit issues. I think it's simply all about money first and safety second. It's like, "We can't hurt the big 3 automaker's profits, but hurting small companies that sell HID kits is OK since that won't affect the economy."
 
Last edited:
I don't think they can distinguish between HID kits and the more numerous aftermarket "blue" bulbs.

So rather than enforce existing laws against improperly aimed 130 watt blue headlights, legislators pass another law that doesn't really address the issue then insist they've "solved the problem".

arggghh.
 
BB said:
I agree. I honestly cannot recall ever being blinded or overly annoyed by an HID system. However I almost hate driving my X in the dark because of SUV's that aim their lights directly in my face (head on) or rebounding in my mirrors (from behind). This problem happens to me in not only the really low NSX, but in normal height cars like an Accord as well.

The height difference between trucks/SUV's and cars is currently the one of the biggest auto safety issues facing NHTSA, yet they refuse to do anything about it because of political reasons. Hurting the SUV industry would literally crush the American automakers. (I'm of course referring to what happens when a large SUV and car collide, but this issue of light height seems closely related to me.)

The solution is not that there should be no SUV's or trucks available, but that NHTSA should be working to decrease the number of them on the road such that only those who need them are using them. Right now we have close to 50% car, 50% Truck/SUV in some areas which is about the worst ratio possible safety wise.

NHTSA is a joke. I have lost a lot of respect for them after seeing how they have largely ignored the large SUV problem and instead focused on very minor HID kit issues. I think it's simply all about money first and safety second. It's like, "We can't hurt the big 3 automaker's profits, but hurting small companies that sell HID kits is OK since that won't affect the economy."

Unfortunately, you are correct. During HW Bush's regime the NHTSA put out a shameful video of a frontal offset crash test between a 2000 pound econobox and a 4000 pound full-size sedan. Nothing shameful about the test itself, but the problem was the addition of a subjective voice over, for the first time in NHTSA history. That argument was used to defeat attempts to raise the CAFE numbers and to end the exemptions for trucks, which still enjoy a loophole large enough to drive, well, a truck through.

Fast forward to today, and do that same offset crash between a 6000 pound SUV and a 3500 pound passenger car, and the passenger car is worse off than it was before. Bumper height plays a huge part in the problem. That, and all the idiots that think an SUV is like a normal car. It is not. Sure, some people need them (gotta tow the boat and the race car, after all), but all of the wanna-be cowboy individual types who buy them for looks need to get off their "high horse" and drive more sensible vehicles.
 
My neighbor saw me installing HIDs and said how much he hated them and they hurt his eyes. I had the original SoS kit (9000k) going in.

Both my Odyssey and the NSX were side by side in the garage. I had him sit in front of the Odyssey and turned the lights on. They where aimed right at him and we both agreed it was blinding and was giving us a headache (like a flashlight in your eyes).

We then sat in front of the HID and you could feel no discomfort and you could see so much around and in front of the car (i.e. it was not "blinding" or even uncomfortable).

Take this test for yourself. IMO - it is the fake bulbs that are hurting your eyes - not professional or OEM HID kits.
 
All those who think "they" should do something about all the "unnecessary" trucks/SUV's would seem to be standing on very shaky ground. I don't enjoy their proliferation either, but I'd be a hypocrite to propose that people should demonstrate "need" to own one. Why should that not be extended to our cars and/or modifications to them? Why do you need 400 HP? Why do you need a car that can do 170mph? Isn't a 2-seater of any kind of too limited utility to be responsible? Why don't you carpool? Perhaps you should be forced to ride a bike to work when the weather is nice if you live less than 5 miles away. It's a very slippery slope.

Back on the real topic, as I said before, even if the OEM ones start out aimed correctly, many won't stay that way. But there is also the issue that people aren't always quick to kill the high beams for on-coming traffic and I've been blinded that way on some twisty roads.

BTW, I'm not talking about he fake blue bulbs, which are not easily mistaken for real HIDs.
 
I am not looking for the government to impose need-based restrictions on SUVs, more for people to impose their own sanity-based restrictions, but I would like to see trucks as part of CAFE and other regulations to reduce their bumper/light height.

There is a difference, however, between SUVs and sports cars. All things being equal, my two-seater is not a danger to other drivers based on its weight, bumper height, and the reduction in visibility for all of those around it. And in a comparison to the NSX, fuel economy is also a factor.

I would have included the danger posed by the SUV owner's misperceptions of the car's abilities, particularly in inclement weather and maneuverability, but sports cars suffer from similar problems of drivers pushing them beyond their capability.
 
I think this article might shed some light on why HIDs are being banned.
Apparently HIDs are being targetted because of the fact that because they don't have conventional filiments, the light source isn't where it was with the oem bulb they replaced.
Since HID light source is an arc that doesn't always eminate from the same place within it's capsule it interacts differently with the reflector system that was built to reflect a filimented bulb.

I guess this is why you have to sometimes re-aim your headlights when changing out burned out bulbs of the same type.

The article is from some guy named Daniel Stern who is supposably an expert in lighting glare. I can't find the actual source for this so I can't vouch for its accuracy but it makes sense to me when I read it.
It is reprinted from HIDforum.com

Article Begins:

There's a lot of handwringing going on, and there's a lot of poor-quality information getting tossed around in the wake of the announcement that the US National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA, the agency under DOT charged with setting and enforcing auto safety standards) is cracking down on the importation and sale of HID "retrofit" kits.

First off, yes, there are problems -- some of them very large and literally glaring -- with the US vehicle lighting regulations. The minimum performance standards for headlamps are pathetic, precisely-formed beam patterns are allowed but not required, red rear turn signals are still allowed, side turn signal flashers are still not required, do-nothing "fog lamps" are allowed and unregulated, etc. This is not to say there are no shortcomings in the rest-of-world European ECE regulations -- there are, they're just different shortcomings!

But, contrary to opinion of late, the HID kit crackdown is not occurring because NHTSA's regulations are antiquated. It is not occurring because of a words-based technicality (no filament in an HID burner so HID conversions are automatically out). It is occurring because HID "conversion" kits are, quite simply, the wrong way to do it.

Undoubtedly, those fascinated by the appearance of an HID headlamp (and others) will disagree, but here are the physical facts of the matter:

These products mainly consist of an HID ballast and bulb for "retrofitting" into a halogen headlamp. Often, these products are advertised using the name of a reputable lighting company ("Real Philips kit! Real Osram kit!") to try to give the potential buyer the illusion of security. While some of the components in these kits are sometimes made by the companies mentioned, the components aren't being put to their designed or intended use. Reputable companies like Philips, Osram, Hella, etc. NEVER endorse this kind of "retrofit" usage of their products. Other "retrofits" come from companies generally known for lighting dreck and schlock -- LED-wafer-on-a-bulb-base "retrofits", cheesy little foggy lites, etc. No matter...the problem with HID retrofits isn't a build-quality constraint; it's an optical-physics constraint.

Halogen headlamps and HID headlamps require very different optics to
produce a safe and effective -- not to mention legal anywhere in the world -- beam pattern. How come? Because of the very different characteristics of the two kinds of light source.

A halogen bulb has a cylindrical light source -- the glowing filament. The space immediately surrounding the cylinder of light is completely dark, and so the sharpest contrast between bright and dark is along the edges of the cylinder of light. The ends of the filament cylinder fade from bright to dark. An HID bulb has a crescent-shaped light source -- the arc. It's crescent-shaped because as it passes through the space between the two electrodes, its heat causes it to try to rise. The space immediately surrounding the crescent of light glows in layers...the closer to the crescent of light, the brighter the glow. The ends of the arc crescent are the brightest points, and immediately beyond these points is completely dark, so the sharpest contrast between bright and dark is at the ends of the crescent of light.

When designing the optics (lens and/or reflector) for a lamp, the
characteristics of the light source are *the* driving factor around which everything else must be engineered. If you go and change the light source, you've done the equivalent of putting on somebody else's eyeglasses -- they may fit on your face OK, but you won't see properly.

Now, what about those "retrofits" in which the beam cutoff still appears sharp? Don't fall into the trap of trying to judge a beam pattern solely by its cutoff! In many lamps, especially the projector types, the cutoff will remain the same regardless of what light source is behind it. Halogen bulb, HID capsule, cigarette lighter, firefly, hold it up to the sun -- whatever. That's because of the way a projector lamp works. The cutoff is simply the projected image of a piece of metal running side-to-side behind the lens. Where the optics come in is in distributing the light (under the cutoff). And, as with all other automotive lamops (and, in fact, all optical instruments), the optics are calculated based not just on where the light source is within the lamp (focal length) but also the specific photometric characteristics of the light source...which parts of it are brighter, which parts of it are darker, where the boundaries of the light source are, whether the boundaries are sharp or fuzzy, the shape of the light source, etc.

There are more "gotchyas" when pondering halogen-to-HID "retrofits". The only available arc capsules have an axial (fore and aft) arc, but many popular halogen headlamp bulbs, such as 9004, 9007, H3 and H12, use a transverse (side-to-side) and/or offset (not directly in line with the central axis of the headlamp reflector) filament, the position and orientation of which is physically impossible to match with a "retrofit" HID capsule. Just because your headlamp might use an axial-filament bulb, though, doesn't mean you've jumped the hurdles -- the laws of optical physics don't bend even for the cleverest marketing department, nor for the catchiest HID "retrofit" kit box.

The latest gimmick is HID arc capsules set in an electromagnetic base so that they shift up and down or back and forth. These are being marketed as "dual beam" kits that claim to address the loss of high beam with fixed-base "retrofits" in place of dual-filament halogen bulbs. What you wind up with is two poorly-formed beams, at best. The reason the original equipment market has not adopted the movable-capsule designs they've been playing with since the mid 1990s is because of the near-impossibility of controlling the arc position accurately so it winds up in the same position each and every time. There are single-capsule dual-beam systems appearing ("BiXenon", etc.), but these all rely on a movable optical shield, or movable reflector -- the arc capsule always stays in one place.

The OE engineers have a great deal more money and resources at their
disposal than the retrofit guys -- if a movable capsule were a practical way to do the job, they'd do it. The "retrofit" kits *certainly* don't address this problem anywhere near satisfaction. And even if they did, remember: Whether a fixed or moving-capsule "retrofit" is contemplated, solving the arc-position problem and calling it good is like going to a hospital with two broken ribs, a sprained ankle and a crushed toe and having the nurse say "Well, you're free to go home now, we've put your ankle in a sling!" Focal length (arc/filament positioning) is ONE issue out of several.

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".

HID headlamps also require careful weatherproofing and electrical
shielding because of the high voltages involved. These unsafe "retrofits" make it physically possible to insert an HID bulb where a halogen bulb belongs, but this practice is illegal and dangerous, regardless of claims by these marketers that their systems are "beam pattern corrected" or the fraudulent use of established brand names to try to trick you into thinking the product is legitimate. In order to work correctly and safely, HID headlamps must be designed from the start as HID headlamps.

The only safe and legitimate HID retrofit is one that replaces the
*entire* headlamp -- that is lens, reflector, bulb...the WHOLE shemozzle-- with optics designed for HID usage. On models for which no complete HID headlamps exist, it IS possible to get clever with
the growing number of available products, such as Hella's modular
projectors available in HID or halogen, and fabricate your own brackets and bezels, or to modify an original-equipment halogen headlamp housing to contain optical "guts" designed for HID usage. But just putting an HID bulb where a halogen one belongs is bad news all around.

And *that*, folks, is why HID kits are getting targetted for enforcement.

DS"
 
Kinan said:
Other "retrofits" come from companies generally known for lighting dreck
This article - also quoted here - is the first time the Yiddish word "dreck" has been used here on NSXprime. Used appropriately, too.

Kinan said:
The only safe and legitimate HID retrofit is one that replaces the *entire* headlamp -- that is lens, reflector, bulb...the WHOLE shemozzle--
Unfortunately, this is not an appropriate usage. Mr. Stern seems to have confused the Yiddish word "shlemazel" with the English word "shebang".
 
or maybe he heard it on the Lavern and Shirley theme song and couldn't spell it!

Laverne And Shirley (from Laverne and Shirley) Schlameel, Schlamaazal Hassenpepper Incorporated We're gonna do it Give us any chance we'll take it Leave us any rule we'll break it We're gonna make our dreams come true Doin' it our way Nothings gonna turn us back now Straight ahead and on the track now We're gonna make our dreams come true Doin' it our way There's nothing we won't try Never heard the word impossible This time there's no stopping us We're gonna do it On your marks get set and go now Got a dream and we just know now We're gonna make that dream come true And we'll do it our way, yes, our way Make all our dreams come true And we'll do it our way, yes, our way Make all our dreams come true For me and you.
 
Kinan: Perhaps cheap, poorly made bulbs do not have the light source in the correct place, but Quality bulbs do. Check out misterjung.com for an explaination and photographic examples compairing the HID capsule placement to the filiment.
 
Damnit all!!! I like my HID kit and I can see a hell of alot more than with those blasted halogen lights and thats all there is to it!!
 

Attachments

  • stewie2.jpg
    stewie2.jpg
    3.6 KB · Views: 215
sjs said:
All those who think "they" should do something about all the "unnecessary" trucks/SUV's would seem to be standing on very shaky ground. I don't enjoy their proliferation either, but I'd be a hypocrite to propose that people should demonstrate "need" to own one.

I am not advocating people should have to prove they need an SUV. What I am advocating is that the government should work towards reducing the the number of SUV's and trucks becasuse of the safety problems they are causing today.

When a large SUV collides with a car, often the occupants of the car are severly injured or killed, while the SUV occupants walk away often unharmed. Larger mass wins.

From this one would think that an SUV is the safer vehicle. Yet, NHTSA's own statistics show that the death rate for SUV's (as a category) is roughly the same as that of cars. How can that be?

The ugly truth is that the average SUV is only safer than a car when colliding with another vehicle smaller than it. In nearly all other cases, the SUV is a less safe vehicle than a car.

First off, SUV's are more likely to get in an accident to begin with because of their poor handling and breaking. Many popular models roll over quite easily when quickly swerving. They also have very poor breakes.

Many SUV's are not built to the same safety standards as that of cars. When one of these SUV's hits into an object of greater mass than itself, the full impact of the crash is often transmitted to the occupants. In this case, you'd have been better off in a car that crumples properly.

Also, according to NHTSA, over 50% of SUV accidents are single car accidents. This supports my previous contention that SUV's have poor handling.

The end result of all this SUV madness is that cars have been made significantly less safe because of the overabundance of SUV's on the road, while the SUV owners are ironically not in any safer position than that of a car!

While our NSX's may be a needless luxury, they do not cause an easily identifiable highway safety issue as does the SUV.
 
matteni said:
My neighbor saw me installing HIDs and said how much he hated them and they hurt his eyes. I had the original SoS kit (9000k) going in.

Both my Odyssey and the NSX were side by side in the garage. I had him sit in front of the Odyssey and turned the lights on. They where aimed right at him and we both agreed it was blinding and was giving us a headache (like a flashlight in your eyes).

We then sat in front of the HID and you could feel no discomfort and you could see so much around and in front of the car (i.e. it was not "blinding" or even uncomfortable).

Take this test for yourself. IMO - it is the fake bulbs that are hurting your eyes - not professional or OEM HID kits.

Exactly my point I stated earlier: even my mom said that "the white lights" blinded her all the time, meanwhile she drives a 02 CRV which basically blinding every living creature out there. I bet of all those "complaints" NHTSA getting was just false claims.

I agreed with you that Politics Stinks and unfortunately it impacted us.
 
When I first bought my X, one of the first things I installed was an electic auto dimming mirror with outside temp and compass built in.
Greatly reduced the problem of headlights shining through into the mirror and into my eyes.

The outside temp and compass is a nice addition... Just like an SUV !
 
Kinan said:
When I first bought my X, one of the first things I installed was an electic auto dimming mirror with outside temp and compass built in.
Greatly reduced the problem of headlights shining through into the mirror and into my eyes.

Yep, but covering up the problem does not resolve the issue at hand: the increase in light output WILL also increase the amount of glare, that is a fact. The point is, how will the glare be handled. If HID emits 3x more light, than its crucial that the headlamps disperse the light evenly to spread all that light out. Its important that consumers understand the power of their headlamps, make sure they are aligned, and make sure their headlamps are clean. Failing to follow these precautions WILL result in glare.

The problem is, the word glare is very easy to say and throw out. Its very hard to say what is glare, and what is not.

The bottom line is that the NHTSA has received complaints. The #1 source of these complaints is not HID, its HID retrofits. We've already had the discussions in this and various other threads, its not to say the NSX and the vendors selling HID upgrades for the NSX are responsible.. but they are getting cought in the midst of things.

The major contributors are companies who falsely advertise their "retrofit kits" as "beam pattern corrected" and "dot approved." False information, leading the consumer into buying an inferior product, thats all.

With the NSX, the car is very low and for the most part, the car shouldnt emit much glare.. but since there is no standard, and since each kit varies SO much in quality and build, there is no way to say it IS or ISNT okay. This is why we've had so many debates on this issue.

What IS interesting, is how those companies who were so quick to sell such kits, are no longer selling them. The fines of selling illegal lighting goods is high, and this is why these products are no longer avail.
 
Old S13, I really don't get the connection between HID lights and glare into the rear view mirror into the NSX.
I wasn't intending it to be a solution to aftermarket HID installation problems. The NSX is so low, ALL headlights tend to shine into it at night, HID or otherwise.
It solved my problem with this issue.
 
Back
Top