GSI

I am the new owner of a Satin Silver TSX, Navi, quartz and automatic tranny.

My question is with the headlights. My low beam lights are really bright and show a wide view of the road. Problem is that they do not show very far down the road. Basically, the viewable horizon is pretty short. The bright lights show a much longer view of the horizon. I do not want to blind anyone with the brights, but also do not want to run into anything either.

Has anyone else experienced this with the low beams? Is this how it is supposed to look? Or should I get my lights adjusted by the dealer?


Thanks,

DLJ

ebcheon

its supposed to be relatively low... but you should still be able to see (not necessarily w/ the lights, but in general).

perhaps you're just getting used to the hid lights. give it a few more weeks but if you feel like you're going to hit something, take it into the dealer and have them adjust it for you.

note: driver side light is supposed to be lower than passenger side light. just fyi incase you were wondering.

GSI

note: driver side light is supposed to be lower than passenger side light. just fyi incase you were wondering.

Thanks for telling me that. The beam pattern was a bit "jagged" at the edges. That explains it.

I just have the feeling that I am going to approach something further out a little too quickly. I will take it to the dealer when the oil change comes up.

Thanks,

DLJ

wiz

This is just the way the HID Projector headlights are. They are not really bulb lights like your brights and thus they have a very clear cut off point. It will take you some time to get used to the projector type lights, and you can have the delaer adjust them a bit, but if they raise them too high, you're going to be blinding people with not only your high beams, but your super white low beams also. Just something to think about...

zero

and you gotta admit they look damm cool when they flicker on!!!

MatrixDude

The HIDs are less strong than the Xenon as I understand it and add to this the fact the bulbs on TL and other acura cars are larger than the TSX ones, so you may be realizing this now

sauceman

Sorry, but no, no, and no.

1. HID's are xenon lighting systems. It means High Intensity Discharge: this system includes bulbs filled with a mixture of xenon (a neutral gas) and salts into which there is an electrical arc crossing from one electrode to the other inside the bulb. The arc puts out the light. It also includes a ballast that usually will give out around 85-90V DC, and an ignitor that gives out an initial 25,000V discharge to ignite the arc. And you got your HID lighting system.

2.The bulbs are the same as TL, CL, RL. They are all either D2R or D2S, and the only difference is a slight variation of increments at the base of the socket. The difference you probably see is that the TSX has projectors, while TL, CL, RL have conventionnal sealed beams. Don't get me wrong: Projectors are superior in that they can diffuse the light beam to a precise area. Projectors over Sealed beams all the way.

3.Still no. Why would high end luxury cars all be equipped with projectors if they were not as performant. Especially BMW who make extensive research year after year to improve lighting performance. If the projector way wasn't the right way, you can wager a whole bunch of money that BMW, Mercedes, Audi, Porsche, Ferrari, and a bunch of other carmakers now wouldn't use them on their cars.

b-tizzle

Sauceman, that was dope !

Very informative and well said !

That pretty much sums it all up.

GSI

test

moreace_RENAMED

neutral gas?
Depends if you were around before or after 1964 (i think that is right)
What you meant to say was noble or inert gasses
It is one of the 6 atoms you see on the right of the periodic table highlighted in red
It is special because the outer shell is full or has exactly 8 electrons so that it can not combine w/ any other atom.
Kinda how the old hydrogen blimps were extremely flammible and helium (also located in red as one of the 6), is not

kcf7z

While we are "correcting". To be absolutely precise one would refer to the group as one of "elements" rather than "atoms".

moreace_RENAMED

hmmmm, that is correct
touche

sauceman

You're right Moreace, it is inert gas I meant to say. My bad.

moreace_RENAMED

Just remembering a little highschool science
I had a good teacher
can't believe I remember that from so many years ago

larchmont

Enjoyed this interchange a lot! Very impressive.

BTW I personally would have given you full credit even for saying "atoms."

(But I would have been WRONG!)

moreace_RENAMED

more of a non proof reading thing. Spell check should fix all. My english teachers hared me.
So, how can er devitate any more from the TSX
ooh ooh
pop quiz
u have to know, no looking it up and cheating
how far is a parsec, and what is it?


I hope I remember the answer ok

larchmont

Didn't even know it was a distance!

joedokes

Moreace was correct in saying atoms. In a single atom of a Noble gas the outer valence of electrons is full, thus it cannot combine with any other atom or atoms. This is true for an atom of the same element or a different element.



Joe D

larchmont

Yeah -- but no chem teacher would say OK about looking at a periodic table and calling them "atoms."

Unless they weren't really paying attention, as I wasn't -- which was why I said "atoms" would've been fine with me!

joedokes

An atom is a singular atomic particle.
It is one atom of an element.

A chem teacher should like this answer since it is more correct than element.



Joe D

moreace_RENAMED

nobody on parsec, the question is expanded to include an astronomical unit now.

gonova

A parsec (a parallax second) is the distance from which the radius of the earth's orbit would subtend an angle of one second. It is approximately 3.26168 light years, or 3.08572 × 10^16 m.

1 pc = 206,265 AU = 3.086 × 1013 km = 3.26 light-years.

moreace_RENAMED

I'm thinking they looked that up
anyone second that?
I am very impressed if you didn't

My definition must be off since it was high school class. 3.26 light years and the distance to the nearest star which is alpha centuri. Unless that is waht you said in whatver you said. Went over my head. Larch will sort it out

larchmont

No! (Lay it on him, Mo!)

And -- hey, Mo, what were you thinking? The nearest star is PROXIMA Centauri! But Alpha is brighter.

Which brings us back to headlights maybe.....

moreace_RENAMED

Sorry, I am relying on info from my memory that is 7 years old. Hey, not bad considering I can't remember what I did last night. anyways I found this on a website:

Alpha Centuri is the next closest star next to the Sun. When one hears that it will take 4.3 light years to travel there, that means that traveling at the speed of light (186,000 miles per second), it would take 4.3 years to get there. That means you would have traveled 24.94 trillion miles in that amount of time. Unfortunately, the shuttle can not travel for an indefinite amount of time. It was not made for such lengthy travel.

Just to stick it to larch a bit:
brightness is to healights
magnitude is to stars

gonova

I remembered the definition (bit of a physics buff, if such a thing exists), but I admit I had to look up the distances involved. Not like the number of atoms in a mohl - now that is something that you never forget. 6.02 x 10^23, if I recall.

moreace_RENAMED

This is fun
I bet we get yelled at by Prov before the night is over
then it will all be worth it

GSI

I have isolated the problem with my headlights. It is not the headlights at all, it was my vision. I got my vision checked out last week and found out that I was nearsighted. They hooked me up with some glasses and man what a difference that made. I can not only see better at night, but all around in general.

Who says a car is not therapeutic!!

larchmont

Yes!!! -- I struck paydirt!

Yes indeed, pal -- How often is it that right away you find a site that answers BOTH issues at once??

Here we go:

Alpha Centauri: The Closest Star System
Credit and Copyright: STSci Digitized Sky Survey, Anglo-Australian Observatory

Explanation: The closest star system to the Sun is the Alpha Centauri system. Of the three stars in the system, the dimmest -- called Proxima Centauri -- is actually the nearest star. The bright stars Alpha Centauri A and B form a close binary as they are separated by only 23 times the Earth- Sun distance - slightly greater than the distance between Uranus and the Sun. In the above picture, the brightness of the stars overwhelm the photograph...."

I wonder if your reference, in saying "next closest" about Alpha Centauri, meant second closest.

You're right, magnitude is a term for stars; but so is "brightness" (which brings us right back to headlights....See, we're not off topic!)

moreace_RENAMED

Wow gsi, way to take this thread off topic

j/k, glad to know u can see again gramps

LeMasseHammer

You'll get used to the cut-off in a few weeks. When I first got my TSX, I was uncomfortable, but now I feel that I actually see more/further than I used to with traditional low beams. The cut-off may be only 100 or so feet in front of you, but there's useful illumination beyond that point, and you get accustomed to making use of it. So your low beams aren't necessarily aimed improperly.

larchmont

I still don't like it, as much as I love the car overall. I think a lot of people won't get used to it.

It looks like it's a very individual thing, probably has a lot to do with what we're used to. As much as I couldn't wait to get rid of my TL-S, I loved those headlights (whose low beams illuminated MUCH further), and that's a tough act to follow.

Iceman

Moreace is inert and passes gas?

moreace_RENAMED

Ok Iceman
U can be my wingman

larchmont

Hey, speaking of physics, I think I just figured something out.

Moreace says his name isn't even Mo. He used to spell the name MoReace, so of course it looked like he's Mo.

But a star-like flash of bright magnitude (and thus we're on topic) tells me that Moreace means "more ace."

Are we getting closer, Mo?

moreace_RENAMED

MoReace is the only spelling I could get on aol when I signed up. The name is like 8 years old. Moe Reece is what I used to yell at Mo Vahn when he played for the Red Sox way back when. My name is actually Paul. Larch not only reads my pointless posts, but remembers and cares. I am touched. Hope this clears it up for you.

rzee

OK, you two! Get a room!!

jcg878

Speaking of headlights, has anyone had to replace one yet? My friend hit a deer with his CL-S and said the headlight was like $600. I'm not sure how much of the headlight is included in that cost, but I have heard that they are expensive.

Personally I like the HID lights, but the other evening I think I was really pissing off this Miata driving in front of me on a bumpy road with his top down!

And speaking of star magnitude, anyone know what the magnitude for the brightest star in the night sky is??

Lung Fu Mo Shi

HID lights are expensive. But it's the PROJECTOR assemblies that really drive up the cost.

larchmont

ARCTURUS? (I sort of looked it up.....) BTW how about the whole sky?

Brightest headlights in our galaxy: TL